Randomized Comparison of Stentless Versus Stented Valves for Aortic Stenosis

Diego Pérez de Arenaza, Belinda Lees, Marcus Flather, Fiona Nugara, Trygve Husebye, Marek Jasiński, Marek Cisowski, Mohammed Khan, Michael Henein, Jullien Gaer,

Circulation · 2005 · 108 citations · 24 references

DOIFull text

Open access

Concepts

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is the established treatment for severe aortic stenosis. In response to the long-term results of aortic homografts, stentless porcine valves were introduced as an alternative low-resistance valve. We conducted a randomized trial comparing a stentless with a stented porcine valve in adults with severe aortic stenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: The primary outcome was change in left ventricular mass index (LVMI) measured by transthoracic echocardiography and, in a subset, by cardiovascular MR. Measurements were taken before valve replacement and at 6 and 12 months. Patients undergoing AVR with an aortic annulus < or =25 mm in diameter were randomly allocated to a stentless (n=93) or a stented supra-annular (n=97) valve. There were no significant differences in mean LVMI between the stentless versus stented groups at baseline (176+/-62 and 182+/-63 g/m2, respectively) or at 6 months (142+/-49 and 131+/-45 g/m2, respectively), although within-group changes from baseline to 6 months were highly significant. Changes in LVMI measured by cardiovascular MR (n=38) were consistent with the echo findings. There was a greater reduction in peak aortic velocity (P<0.001) and a greater increase in indexed effective orifice area (P<0.001) in the stentless group than in the stented group. There were no differences in clinical outcomes between the 2 valve groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant differences in indexed effective orifice area and peak flow velocity in favor of the stentless valve, there were similar reductions in left ventricular mass at 6 months with both stented and stentless valves, which persisted at 12 months.

References

24