COMPARISON OF THE MANUFACTURER'S TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS WITH POSTOPERATIVE RESULTS IN FOUR TYPES OF STENTED BIOPROSTHESES IN THE AORTIC POSITION
The problem of the best bioprosthesis type for aortic valve substitute is unresolved. We used bioprostheses from four manufacturers for patients in older age group. The aim of the study was to analyze technical characteristics of the valves, compare hemodynamics between four valve types in 21, 23, 25 sizes in our and literature data. The research was retrospective and unrandomised. During the period 1.01.2007–1.06.2018 in the district of cardiosurgery of Belgorod regional Hospital 169 bioprostheses were implanted in aortic position. 21 mm size valves were used in 74 cases, 23 mm size in 66 cases, 25 mm in 29 cases. Stented bioprostheses of four manufacturers were used: Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT (Edwards, USA), Aspire (Vascutek, USA), Hancock-2 (Medtroniс, USA), UniLine (NeoCor, Russia). Technical characteristics of the valves were obtained from official sources of manufacturers. The evaluated parameter were: peak and mean gradient, stroke volume. Comparison of three hemodynamic parameters in early postoperative period revealed best hydrodynamic results with UniLine (NeoCor) valve. The Hancock-2 stented valve conceded all other prostheses. According to technical characteristics: internal diameter, external diameter and their interrelationship the best was the UniLine (NeoCor) valve. Among the four investigated valves the UniLine (NeoCor) valve showed most effective hemodynamics and morphometry. Thus it proposes better systolic and diastolic left ventricle function, more complete hypertrophy regress. In combination with flexible stent this valve is preferable for surgical implantation.
Sazonenkov M.A., Ismatov Kh.H., Prisyazhnyuk E.I., Selyukova E.I., Grechishkina Yu.K., Ko-valenko I.B., Kulikovsky V.F. 2019. Comparison of the manufacturer's technical specifications with post-operative results in four types of stented bioprostheses in the aortic position. Challenges in Modern Medi-cine, 43(1): 113–122 (in Russian). DOI
While nobody left any comments to this publication.
You can be first.
1. Bokeriya L.A., Skopin I.I., Sazonenkov M.A., Tumaev E.N. 2008. K voprosu anatomii kornya aorty. Sootnoshenie diametrov aortal'nogo kol'tsa i sinotubulyarnogo soedineniya v norme u vzroslykh. Ideal'naya geometricheskaya model' kornya aorty [On the issue of anatomy of the aortic root. The ratio of the diameters of the aortic ring and the sinotubular connection is normal in adults. The ideal geometric model of the aortic root]. Byulleten' NTsSSKh im. A.N. Bakuleva RAMN. 9 (4): 77–85.
2. Company official information. «NeoCor» 1978–2020, https://neocor.ru/aortalnyy-klapan-3.
3. Karas'kov A.M., Zheleznev S.I., Rogulina N.V., Sapegin A.V., Odarenko Yu.N., Levadin Yu.V., Barbarash L.S. 2017. Domestic biological prosthesis of the new generation «UniLine» in surgery for mitral malformation: the first experience. Thoracic and cardiovascular surgery. 59(2): 98–104.
4. Klyshnikov K.U., Ovcharenko E.A., Scheglova N.A., Barbarash L.S. 2017. Functional characteristics of biological protection «Uniline». Complex Issues of Cardiovascular Diseases. 3: 6–12. https://doi.org/10.17802/2306-1278-2017-6-3-6-12.
5. Rogulina N.V., Sizova I.N., Gorbunova E.V. 2013. Left cardiac chambers after implantation of mitral valve prostheses «MIX», «MEDINGE-2», «KemCor», and «PeriCor». Russ J Cardiol. 5 (103): 35–39.
6. Sazonenkov M.A., Ismatov Kh.H., Popovichev S.V., Prisyazhnyuk E.I., Selyukova E.I., Grechishkina Yu.K., Kovalenko I.B., Kulikovskiy V.F. 2020. Immediate results comparison of bioprostheses UniLine, (NeoCor), CE Perimount, Aspire, Hancock-2 in aortic position. Complex Issues of Cardiovascular Diseases. 9 (1) (in print).
7. Fedorov S.A., Chiginev V.A., Zhurko S.A., Gamzaev A.B., Medvedev A.P. 2016. Clinical and hemodynamic results of applying different biological prosthesis models for correction of calcific aortic valve disease. Sovremennye tehnologii v medicine. 8 (4): 292–296.
8. Chiginev V.A., Esin S.G., Zhurko S.A. 2014. Neposredstvennye rezul'taty korrektsii razlichnykh klapannykh porokov bioprotezam vascutek aspire u patsientov pozhilogo i starcheskogo vozrasta. (Direct results of the correction of various valvular defects of Vascutek Aspire bioprostheses in elderly and senile patients.) Meditsinskiy Al'manakh. 2 (32): 157–160.
9. Burk J., Blanke P., Stankovic Z., Barker A., Russe M., Geiger J., Frydrychowicz A., Langer M., Markl M. 2012. Evaluation of 3D blood flow patterns and wall shear stress in the normal and dilated thoracic aorta using flow-sensitive 4D CMR. J. Cardiovasc. Magn. Reson. 14(1): 84.
10. Ji Hoon You, Dong Seop Jeong, Kiick Sung, Wook Sung Kim, K.C. Carriere, Young Tak Lee, Pyo Won Park. 2016. Aortic Valve Replacement With Carpentier-Edvards: Hemodynamic Outcomes for the 19th Valve. Ann Thorac Surg. 101: 2209–16.
11. Marquez S., Hon R.T., Yoganathan A.P. 2001. Comparative hydrodynamic evaluation of bioprosthetic heart valves. J. Heart. Valve. Dis. 10(6): 802–11.
12. Theodore Long, Becky M. Lopez, Christopher Berberian, Mark J. Cunningham, Vaughn A. Starnes and Robbin G. Cohen. 2014. Exercise Hemodynamics and Quality of Life after Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis in the Elderly Using the Hancock II Bioprosthesis.Cardiology Research and Practice Volume. Article ID 151282, 5 pages, http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/151282.
13. Vinayak Bapat, Rizwan Attia, Simon Redwood, Jane Hancock, Karen Wilson, Christopher Young and Martyn Thomas. 2012. Use of transcatheter heart valves for a valve-in-valve implantation in patients with degenerated aortic bioprosthesis: Technical considerations and results.The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 144(6): 1372–80.
14. Weigang E., Kari F.A., Beyersdorf F., Luehr M., Etz C.D., Frydrychowicz A., Harloff A., Markl M. 2008. Flow-sensitive four-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging: flow patterns in ascending aortic aneurysms. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 34(1): 11–6.
15. Company official information. Medtronic plc. 1949–2020, https://www.medtronic.com
16. Company official information. Edwards Life sciences. 1956–2020, https://www.edwards.com