1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Perceval valve intermediate outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis at 5-year follow-up

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          New technologies for the treatment of Aortic Stenosis are evolving to minimize risk and treat an increasingly comorbid population. The Sutureless Perceval Valve is one such alternative. Whilst short-term data is promising, limited mid-term outcomes exist, until now. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate mid-term outcomes in the Perceval Valve in isolation.

          Methods

          A systematic literature review of 5 databases was performed. Articles included evaluated echocardiographic and mortality outcomes beyond 5 years in patients who had undergone Perceval Valve AVR. Two reviewers extracted and reviewed the articles. Weighted estimates were performed for all post-operative and mid-term data. Aggregated Kaplan Meier curves were reconstructed from digitised images to evaluate long-term survival.

          Results

          Seven observational studies were identified, with a total number of 3196 patients analysed. 30-day mortality was 2.5%. Aggregated survival at 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years was 93.4%, 89.4%, 84.9%, 82% and 79.5% respectively. Permanent pacemaker implantation (7.9%), severe paravalvular leak (1.6%), structural valve deterioration (1.5%), stroke (4.4%), endocarditis (1.6%) and valve explant (2.3%) were acceptable at up to mid-term follow up. Haemodynamics were also acceptable at up mid-term with mean-valve gradient (range 9–13.6 mmHg), peak-valve gradient (17.8–22.3 mmHg) and effective orifice area (1.5–1.8 cm 2) across all valve sizes. Cardiopulmonary bypass (78 min) and Aortic cross clamp times (52 min) were also favourable.

          Conclusion

          To our knowledge, this represents the first meta-analysis to date evaluating mid-term outcomes in the Perceval Valve in isolation and demonstrates good 5-year mortality, haemodynamic and morbidity outcomes.

          Key question

          What are the mid-term outcomes at up to 5 years follow up in Perceval Valve Aortic Valve Replacement?

          Key findings

          Perceval Valve AVR achieves 80% freedom from mortality at 5 years with low valve gradients and minimal morbidity .

          Key outcomes

          Perceval Valve Aortic Valve Replacement has acceptable mid-term mortality, durability and haemodynamic outcomes.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13019-023-02273-7.

          Related collections

          Most cited references76

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions

          Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions”), a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness (harm or benefit) of interventions from studies that did not use randomisation to allocate units (individuals or clusters of individuals) to comparison groups. The tool will be particularly useful to those undertaking systematic reviews that include non-randomised studies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence.

            This article introduces the approach of GRADE to rating quality of evidence. GRADE specifies four categories-high, moderate, low, and very low-that are applied to a body of evidence, not to individual studies. In the context of a systematic review, quality reflects our confidence that the estimates of the effect are correct. In the context of recommendations, quality reflects our confidence that the effect estimates are adequate to support a particular recommendation. Randomized trials begin as high-quality evidence, observational studies as low quality. "Quality" as used in GRADE means more than risk of bias and so may also be compromised by imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness of study results, and publication bias. In addition, several factors can increase our confidence in an estimate of effect. GRADE provides a systematic approach for considering and reporting each of these factors. GRADE separates the process of assessing quality of evidence from the process of making recommendations. Judgments about the strength of a recommendation depend on more than just the quality of evidence. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients.

              Previous trials have shown that among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis, survival rates are similar with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic-valve replacement. We evaluated the two procedures in a randomized trial involving intermediate-risk patients.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                jarrod.jolliffe@outlook.com
                Journal
                J Cardiothorac Surg
                J Cardiothorac Surg
                Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
                BioMed Central (London )
                1749-8090
                11 April 2023
                11 April 2023
                2023
                : 18
                : 129
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.416153.4, ISNI 0000 0004 0624 1200, Cardiothoracic Department, , Royal Melbourne Hospital, ; 300 Grattan Street Parkville, Melbourne, VIC Australia
                [2 ]GRID grid.7637.5, ISNI 0000000417571846, School of Cardiac Surgery, , University of Brescia, ; Brescia, Italy
                [3 ]GRID grid.1018.8, ISNI 0000 0001 2342 0938, Centre for Cardiovascular Biology and Disease Research, , Latrobe University, ; Melbourne, VIC Australia
                Article
                2273
                10.1186/s13019-023-02273-7
                10091543
                37041628
                d6ee12e9-6b1a-4630-9b25-e296fb8f08fa
                © Crown 2023

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 16 October 2022
                : 4 April 2023
                Categories
                Review
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2023

                Surgery
                sutureless aortic valve replacement,minimally invasive valve replacement,rapid deployment aortic valve replacement

                Comments

                Comment on this article