Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39070555›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024

Single-center real-world data and technical considerations from 100 consecutive patients treated with the Perceval aortic bioprosthesis.

Hannes Müller, Philipp Szalkiewicz, Peter Benedikt, Thomas Ratschiller, Bruno Schachner, Sophie Schröckenstein, Andreas Zierer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

7 authors.

Hannes MüllerDepartment of Cardio-Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, Kepler University Hospital-Faculty of Medicine, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria.
Philipp SzalkiewiczDepartment of Cardio-Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, Kepler University Hospital-Faculty of Medicine, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria.
Peter BenediktDepartment of Cardio-Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, Kepler University Hospital-Faculty of Medicine, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria.
Thomas RatschillerDepartment of Cardio-Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, Kepler University Hospital-Faculty of Medicine, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria.
Bruno SchachnerDepartment of Cardio-Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, Kepler University Hospital-Faculty of Medicine, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria.
Sophie SchröckensteinDepartment of Cardio-Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, Kepler University Hospital-Faculty of Medicine, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria.
Andreas ZiererDepartment of Cardio-Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, Kepler University Hospital-Faculty of Medicine, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Although the Perceval sutureless aortic valve bioprosthesis presents a feasible alternative to conventional aortic valve prostheses, the extent of its applicability with respect to technical considerations for a real-world patient collective is still under debate. Methods: One hundred patients received the Perceval prosthesis [males: 59; age: 72.5 (7.3-79) years] between December 2015 and February 2023 [EuroSCORE II: 2.8 (1.7-5.4)] for an aortic valve replacement (AVR), with additional concomitant procedures, for underlying severe aortic valve stenosis [ Results: Over a median follow-up time of 36.5 (16.5-53) months, eight patients (8%) underwent postoperative pacemaker implantation, with five (5%) due to high-grade atrioventricular block, while nine patients experienced a stroke (9%). The median values of maximum and mean gradients across all valve sizes were 22 (18-27.5) mmHg and 10 (13-18) mmHg, respectively. Two patients (2%) had moderate and one (1%) had severe paravalvular leakage, with the latter presenting the only case of underlying valve migration and induced redo AVR with valve explantation 2 days following initial surgery. Thirty-day mortality (and overall mortality) was 5% and 26%, respectively. Conclusion: The implantation of the Perceval bioprosthesis is feasible for a variety of indications, with excellent hemodynamic results and low complication rates in a real-world high-risk patient collective.

Indexed as

aortic valve replacementaortic valve surgerybiologic aortic valvePerceval aortic valvesutureless aortic valve prosthesis

Identifiers

PMID39070555
PMCPMC11272482

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.