Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37307090›Full record

ArticleInterdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2023

Clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of the Perceval sutureless aortic valve from a real-world registry.

Giovanni Concistré, Max Baghai, Giuseppe Santarpino, Alistair Royse, Maximilian Scherner, Giovanni Troise, Mattia Glauber, Marco Solinas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Giovanni ConcistréDepartment of Adult Cardiac Surgery, G Pasquinucci Heart Hospital, Massa, Italy.
Max BaghaiCardiothoracic Surgery, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Giuseppe SantarpinoDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Città di Lecce Hospital, GVM Care & Research, Lecce, Italy.
Alistair RoyseCardiothoracic Surgery, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4449-663X
Maximilian SchernerDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
Giovanni TroiseDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation/Cardiac Surgery Unit, Brescia, Italy.
Mattia GlauberDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Gruppo San Donato, Milano, Italy.
Marco SolinasDepartment of Adult Cardiac Surgery, G Pasquinucci Heart Hospital, Massa, Italy.

Funding

CORCYM S.r.l
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPerceval sutureless valve has been in clinical use for >15 years. The aim of this study is to report the real-word clinical and haemodynamic performance from the SURE-aortic valve replacement international prospective registry in patients who underwent aortic valve replacement with Perceval valve.

methodsFrom 2011 to 2021, patients from 55 institutions received a Perceval valve. Postoperative, follow-up, and echocardiographic outcomes were analysed.

resultsA total of 1652 patients were included; mean age was 75.3 ± 7.0 years (53.9% female); mean EuroSCORE II was 4.1 ± 6.3. Minimally invasive approach was performed in 45.3% of patients; concomitant procedures were done in 35.9% of cases. Within 30 days, 0.3 and 0.7% valve-related reinterventions were reported. Transient ischaemic attack, disabling and non-disabling strokes were limited (0.4%, 0.4% and 0.7%, respectively). Pacemaker implant was required in 5.7% of patients. Intra-prosthetic regurgitation ≥2 was present in 0.2% of cases, while paravalvular leak ≥2 in only 0.1%. At a maximum follow-up of 8 years, 1.9% of cardiovascular deaths and 0.8% of valve-related reintervention occurred. Among the 10 cases of structural valve deterioration (mean 5.6 ± 1.4 years after implant; range: 2.6-7.3 years), 9 were treated with a transcatheter vale-in-valve implantation and 1 with explant. Mean pressure gradient decreased from 45.8 ± 16.5 mmHg preoperatively to 13.3 ± 5.2 mmHg at discharge and remained stable during follow-up.

conclusionsThis experience represents the largest prospective real-world cohort of patients treated with Perceval showing that Perceval is a safe and effective alternative to conventional surgical aortic valve replacement, providing favourable clinical and haemodynamic results also at mid-term follow-up.

Indexed as

Aortic stenosisAortic valve replacementReal-world evidenceSutureless valves

Identifiers

PMID37307090
PMCPMC10281856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.