@article{ACS16755,
author = {Antonio Miceli and Paolo Berretta and Antonio Fiore and Martin Andreas and Marco Solinas and Giuseppe Santarpino and Utz Kappert and Martin Misfeld and Carlo Savini and Alberto Albertini and Emmanuel Villa and Kevin Phan and Theodor Fischlein and Bart Meuris and Gianluca Martinelli and Kevin Teoh and Carmelo Mignosa and Malakh Shrestha and Thierry P. Carrel and Tristan D. Yan and Mattia Glauber and Marco Di Eusanio},
title = {Sutureless and rapid deployment implantation in bicuspid aortic valve: results from the sutureless and rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement international registry},
journal = {Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery},
volume = {9},
number = {4},
year = {2020},
keywords = {},
abstract = {Background: Benefits of sutureless and rapid deployment (SURD) bioprostheses in bicuspid aortic valves (BAV) are controversial. The aim of this study is to report the outcomes of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) for BAV from the Sutureless and Rapid-Deployment Aortic Valve Replacement International Registry (SURD-IR).
Methods: Of the 4,636 patients who received primary isolated SURD-AVR between 2007 and 2018, 191 (4.1%) BAV patients underwent AVR with SURD valve.
Results: Overall 30-day mortality was 1.6%. The Intuity valve was implanted in 53.9% of cases, whereas the Perceval was implanted in 46.1%. Rate of stroke for isolated AVR was 4.2%. No case of endocarditis, thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, valve dislocation or structural valve deterioration was reported in the early phase. Rate of pacemaker implantation and moderate-severe aortic regurgitation (AR) were 7.9% and 3.7%, respectively.
Conclusions: BAV is not considered a contraindication for the implantation of SURD valves. However, detailed information of aortic root geometry as well as the knowledge of some technical considerations are mandatory for a good outcome.},
issn = {2304-1021}, url = {https://www.annalscts.com/article/view/16755}
}