ReviewJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2025
Perceval prosthesis implantation into challenging degenerated aortic valves: a literature review and case series.
Review in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Perceval Sutureless prosthesis can increase the effective orifice area (EOA) and reduce the chance of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM). This report presents three patients with challenging degenerated bioprosthetic valves undergoing redo aortic valve replacement (rAVR) using the Perceval (LivaNova, London, UK) prosthesis from a cohort of more than 300 performed cases and a review of the literature on the management of challenging degenerated valves.
methodsCase 1: Degenerated 23 mm Trifecta with the valve cage densely adherent to the annulus. Cage with sewing ring were excised and annulus sized to a large Perceval valve. Case 2: Degenerated 29 mm Epic from a Bentall's procedure. Calcified and rigid prosthetic leaflets as well as stent posts were excised and XL Perceval implanted. Case 3: Degenerated 27 mm Epic with signs of endocarditis from a history of Bentall's procedure. Three calcified leaflets of the Epic valve were completely excised. The orifice accepted a medium Perceval.
resultsThe total Cardiopulmonary Bypass (CPB) and aortic cross clamp (ACC) times (in minutes) were 99.76, 117.68 and 143.99 in Cases 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Moreover, post-implantation transesophageal echocardiogram (TOE) demonstrated a well-seated valve, no paravalvular leak in all cases and a peak gradient of 12.7 mmHg, 14.8 mmHg and 17.7 mmHg in Cases 1, 2 and 3, respectively.
conclusionThe Perceval prosthesis is an excellent choice for rAVR, as it can safely simplify challenging cases at risk of PPM and is an excellent valve-in-valve alternative to degenerated or infected Bentall valves with patent graft. The Perceval prosthesis can be well seated on the different structures of a degenerated bioprosthetic valve.
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.