Tackling the Issue of High Postoperative Pacemaker Implantation Rates in Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement: Should Balloon Inflation be Removed from the Implantation Method of the Perceval Prosthesis?

BACKGROUND

Sutureless aortic valve replacement (AVR) is an emerging alternative to standard AVR in elderly and high-risk patients. This procedure is associated with a high rate of postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI). The study aim was to assess the impact on the rate of PPI of implanting the Perceval prosthesis without using balloon inflation.

METHODS

A total of 159 patients who underwent sutureless AVR using the Perceval prosthesis was included. Balloon inflation was used in 132 patients (Balloon group) and not used in the remaining 27 (No-Balloon group). Clinical, echocardiographic and electrocardiographic outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in PPI rate between the two groups (26% for Balloon group versus 22% in No-Balloon group; p = 0.700). Balloon inflation had no significant impact on the incidence of paravalvular leaks (p = 0.839), or on the need to return to cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) intraoperatively due to paravalvular leak or unsatisfactory deployment (p >0.999). Mean and peak transaortic pressure gradients were similar between the two groups (p = 0.417 and p = 0.522, respectively). Cross-clamp and CPB times were shorter in the No-Balloon group (49.6 ± 15.9 min versus 61.1 ± 25.6 min and 64.1 ± 26.3 min versus 79.6 ± 35.4 min, respectively; p = 0.027 and p = 0.012, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The two groups had similar postoperative PPI rates. Implanting the Perceval prosthesis without balloon inflation is safe and had no impact on paravalvular leaks, intraoperative complications or hemodynamic results. Reductions in aortic cross-clamp time and CPB time were observed when the balloon was not used.