ReviewJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2021
Use of Sutureless and Rapid Deployment Prostheses in Challenging Reoperations.
Review in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- The "floating" valve, a modified bioroot Bentall procedure.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Redo aortic valve replacement with the Perceval valve: the ideal stepping stone in the lifetime management of aortic stenosis?Kardiochirurgia i torakochirurgia polska = Polish journal of cardio-thoracic surgery · 2025Article
- A rapid deployment valve option for failing Medtronic Freestyle full root: a single centre experience.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2024Article
- Simplifying complex aortic root reoperations.JTCVS techniques · 2024Article
- Multicentre experience of sutureless prostheses inside degenerated stentless aortic valves and bioroots.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2024Article
- Successful Implantation of Rapid Deployment Aortic Valve after TAVR Explantation.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2024Article
- Sutureless Biological Aortic Valve Replacement (Su-AVR) in Redo operations: a retrospective real-world experience report of clinical and echocardiographic outcomes.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Article
- Sutureless and Rapid Deployment Prosthesis in Redo-Bentall Endocarditis.Case reports in surgery · 2024Article
- Single-center real-world data and technical considerations from 100 consecutive patients treated with the Perceval aortic bioprosthesis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Milestone Operations in Heart Valve and Aortic Replacement: Anniversaries Worth Remembering.Aorta (Stamford, Conn.) · 2023Article
- Sutureless Aortic Valve Prosthesis in Redo Procedures: Single-Center Experience.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Replacement of a Calcified Aortic Valve in a Porcine Aortic Root with the Perceval Sutureless Bioprosthesis.Aorta (Stamford, Conn.) · 2022Article
- Sutureless bioprostheses for aortic valve reoperations: How to get out of troubles.JTCVS techniques · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sutureless and rapid-deployment bioprostheses have been introduced as alternatives to traditional prosthetic valves to reduce cardiopulmonary and aortic cross-clamp times during aortic valve replacement. These devices have also been employed in extremely demanding surgical settings, as underlined in the present review. Searches on the PubMed and Medline databases aimed to identify, from the English-language literature, the reported cases where both sutureless and rapid-deployment prostheses were employed in challenging surgical situations, usually complex reoperations sometimes even performed as bailout procedures. We have identified 25 patients for whom a sutureless or rapid-deployment prosthesis was used in complex redo procedures: 17 patients with a failing stentless bioprosthesis, 6 patients with a failing homograft, and 2 patients with the failure of a valve-sparing procedure. All patients survived reoperation and were reported to be alive 3 months to 4 years postoperatively. Sutureless and rapid-deployment bioprostheses have proved effective in replacing degenerated stentless bioprostheses and homografts in challenging redo procedures. In these settings, they should be considered as a valid alternative not only to traditional prostheses but also in selected cases to transcatheter valve-in-valve solutions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.