• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Perimount MAGNA Ease瓣膜与INSPIRIS Resilia瓣膜对比:70岁以下患者血流动力学性能的倾向评分匹配分析

Perimount MAGNA Ease vs. INSPIRIS Resilia Valve: A PS-Matched Analysis of the Hemodynamic Performances in Patients below 70 Years of Age.

作者信息

Francica Alessandra, Tonelli Filippo, Rossetti Cecilia, Galeone Antonella, Perrone Fabiola, Luciani Giovanni Battista, Onorati Francesco

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Dentistry, Paediatrics, and Gynaecology, Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Verona Medical School, 37129 Verona, Italy.

出版信息

J Clin Med. 2023 Mar 6;12(5):2077. doi: 10.3390/jcm12052077.

DOI:10.3390/jcm12052077
PMID:36902862
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10004583/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

During the past decade, the Perimount Magna Ease (PME) bioprosthesis has been implanted worldwide for aortic valve replacement (AVR). Recently, the INSPIRIS Resilia (IR) valve has been introduced as the newest generation of pericardial bioprostheses. However, few data have been reported about patients ≤70 years, and no comparisons in terms of hemodynamic performance between these two bioprostheses have been ever reported.

METHODS

Patients aged <70 years undergoing AVR were considered for comparison between PME ( = 238) and IR ( = 192). Propensity score (PS) matching was performed by logistic regression with adjustment for eight key baseline variables. The two prostheses were compared in terms of hemodynamic performances up to 3 years postoperatively. Sub-analysis according to prosthetic size-category was accomplished.

RESULTS

A total of 122 pairs with similar baseline characteristics were obtained from the PS-matching. The two prostheses showed comparable hemodynamic performances at one year (Gmean: 11.3 ± 3.5 mmHg vs. 11.9 ± 5.4 mmHg; = 0.8) and at 3 years postoperatively (Gmean: 12.2 ± 7.9 mmHg vs. 12.8 ± 5.2 mmHg for; = 0.3). The sub-analysis of size-category confirmed no statistical differences concerning the hemodynamic performances for each annulus size.

CONCLUSIONS

This first PS-matched analysis demonstrated that the newly developed IR valve achieves the same safety and efficacy of the PME valve during mid-term follow-up in patients aged <70 years.

摘要

背景

在过去十年间,Perimount Magna Ease(PME)生物瓣膜已在全球范围内用于主动脉瓣置换术(AVR)。最近,INSPIRIS Resilia(IR)瓣膜作为新一代心包生物瓣膜被引入。然而,关于70岁及以下患者的数据报道较少,且从未有过这两种生物瓣膜血流动力学性能比较的报道。

方法

将年龄<70岁接受AVR的患者纳入PME(n = 238)和IR(n = 192)的比较研究。通过逻辑回归进行倾向评分(PS)匹配,并对八个关键基线变量进行调整。比较两种瓣膜术后3年内的血流动力学性能。根据假体尺寸类别进行亚分析。

结果

通过PS匹配共获得122对基线特征相似的患者。两种瓣膜在术后1年(几何平均压差:11.3±3.5 mmHg vs. 11.9±5.4 mmHg;P = 0.8)和3年(几何平均压差:12.2±7.9 mmHg vs. 12.8±5.2 mmHg;P = 0.3)时的血流动力学性能相当。尺寸类别亚分析证实,各瓣环尺寸的血流动力学性能无统计学差异。

结论

这一首次PS匹配分析表明,新研发的IR瓣膜在70岁及以下患者的中期随访中,实现了与PME瓣膜相同的安全性和有效性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/105a/10004583/39515ff7e223/jcm-12-02077-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/105a/10004583/2488793f837c/jcm-12-02077-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/105a/10004583/39515ff7e223/jcm-12-02077-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/105a/10004583/2488793f837c/jcm-12-02077-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/105a/10004583/39515ff7e223/jcm-12-02077-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Perimount MAGNA Ease vs. INSPIRIS Resilia Valve: A PS-Matched Analysis of the Hemodynamic Performances in Patients below 70 Years of Age.Perimount MAGNA Ease瓣膜与INSPIRIS Resilia瓣膜对比:70岁以下患者血流动力学性能的倾向评分匹配分析
J Clin Med. 2023 Mar 6;12(5):2077. doi: 10.3390/jcm12052077.
2
Mid-term clinical and echocardiographic results of the INSPIRIS RESILIA aortic valve: a retrospective comparison to the Magna Ease.INSPIRIS RESILIA主动脉瓣的中期临床和超声心动图结果:与Magna Ease的回顾性比较。
Interdiscip Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2023 Jul 19;37(1). doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivad117.
3
Multicenter, propensity-weighted comparison of stented, rapid-deployment and new-generation aortic valves.多中心、倾向评分加权法比较带支架、快速释放及新一代主动脉瓣
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2024 Aug 22;54:101487. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2024.101487. eCollection 2024 Oct.
4
Hemodynamic performance of INSPIRIS RESILIA aortic bioprosthesis for severe aortic stenosis: 2-year follow-up in Japanese cohort.INSPIRIS RESILIA 主动脉生物瓣在重度主动脉瓣狭窄患者中的血流动力学性能:日本队列的 2 年随访结果。
J Artif Organs. 2022 Dec;25(4):323-328. doi: 10.1007/s10047-022-01316-5. Epub 2022 Feb 7.
5
Trifecta Versus Perimount Magna Ease Aortic Valve Prostheses. trifecta 与 perimount magna ease 主动脉瓣假体
Ann Thorac Surg. 2020 Sep;110(3):879-888. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2019.12.071. Epub 2020 Feb 12.
6
Mid-term outcomes of Sapien 3 versus Perimount Magna Ease for treatment of severe aortic stenosis.Sapien 3与Perimount Magna Ease治疗重度主动脉瓣狭窄的中期结果
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2020 Jun 29;15(1):157. doi: 10.1186/s13019-020-01203-1.
7
Hemodynamic performance of the Medtronic Mosaic and Perimount Magna aortic bioprostheses: five-year results of a prospectively randomized study.美敦力马赛克和百多力 Magnia 主动脉生物瓣的血液动力学性能:一项前瞻性随机研究的 5 年结果。
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011 Jun;39(6):844-52; discussion 852. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2010.11.015. Epub 2010 Dec 28.
8
The effective orifice area/patient aortic annulus area ratio: a better way to compare different bioprostheses? A prospective randomized comparison of the Mosaic and Perimount bioprostheses in the aortic position.有效瓣口面积与患者主动脉瓣环面积之比:比较不同生物瓣膜的更好方法?主动脉位置的Mosaic和Perimount生物瓣膜的前瞻性随机对照研究。
J Heart Valve Dis. 2004 May;13(3):382-8; discussion 388-9.
9
Early results of the Resilia Inspiris aortic valve in the old age patients - a retrospective comparison with the Carpentier Edwards Magna Ease.老年患者中Resilia Inspiris主动脉瓣的早期结果——与Carpentier Edwards Magna Ease的回顾性比较
J Cardiovasc Thorac Res. 2020;12(3):222-226. doi: 10.34172/jcvtr.2020.38. Epub 2020 Aug 26.
10
The new St Jude Trifecta versus Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna and Magna Ease aortic bioprosthesis: is there a hemodynamic superiority?新型 St Jude Trifecta 与 Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna 和 Magna Ease 主动脉生物瓣比较:是否具有血液动力学优势?
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 May;147(5):1553-60. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.05.045. Epub 2013 Jul 16.

引用本文的文献

1
Mid-Term Outcomes After Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients Under 70: A Comparative Study of INSPIRIS RESILIA Versus PERIMOUNT MAGNA EASE Bioprostheses.70岁以下患者主动脉瓣置换术后的中期结果:INSPIRIS RESILIA与PERIMOUNT MAGNA EASE生物瓣膜的比较研究
Interdiscip Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2025 Aug 5;40(8). doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivaf169.
2
Exploratory Cost-Effectiveness of a Novel Bioprosthetic Valve for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Spain.西班牙一种新型生物人工心脏瓣膜用于外科主动脉瓣置换术的探索性成本效益分析
Pharmacoecon Open. 2025 May 31. doi: 10.1007/s41669-025-00582-2.
3
Early and late clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of aortic valve replacement using the Inspiris Resilia bioprosthesis : A systematic review and meta-analysis.

本文引用的文献

1
Long-term durability of a new surgical aortic valve: A 1 billion cycle in vitro study.新型外科主动脉瓣的长期耐久性:一项10亿次循环的体外研究。
JTCVS Open. 2021 Nov 4;9:59-69. doi: 10.1016/j.xjon.2021.10.056. eCollection 2022 Mar.
2
Comparison of Long-term Performance of Bioprosthetic Aortic Valves in Sweden From 2003 to 2018.2003 年至 2018 年瑞典生物瓣主动脉瓣的长期性能比较。
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Mar 1;5(3):e220962. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.0962.
3
Five-year Outcomes of the COMMENCE Trial Investigating Aortic Valve Replacement With RESILIA Tissue.
使用Inspiris Resilia生物假体进行主动脉瓣置换术的早期和晚期临床结果及成本效益:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2025 Feb 5;20(1):117. doi: 10.1186/s13019-024-03269-7.
RESILIA 组织补片行主动脉瓣置换术的 COMMENCE 试验的 5 年结果。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2023 Jun;115(6):1429-1436. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2021.12.058. Epub 2022 Jan 20.
4
Carpentier-Edwards Magna Ease bioprosthesis: a multicentre clinical experience and 12-year durability.卡彭蒂埃-爱德华兹玛格纳易生物瓣:多中心临床经验和 12 年耐久性。
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2022 Mar 24;61(4):888-896. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezab552.
5
Surgical pericardial heart valves: 50 Years of evolution.外科心脏生物瓣膜:50 年的发展历程。
Int J Surg. 2021 Oct;94:106121. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106121. Epub 2021 Sep 17.
6
Valve Academic Research Consortium 3: Updated Endpoint Definitions for Aortic Valve Clinical Research.瓣膜学术研究联合会 3:主动脉瓣临床研究更新终点定义。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021 Jun 1;77(21):2717-2746. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.02.038. Epub 2021 Apr 19.
7
Device profile of the Inspiris Resilia valve for aortic valve replacement: overview of its safety and efficacy.Inspiris Resilia 主动脉瓣置换瓣膜器械特性:安全性和有效性概述。
Expert Rev Med Devices. 2021 Mar;18(3):239-244. doi: 10.1080/17434440.2021.1886921. Epub 2021 Feb 27.
8
Magna ease bioprosthetic aortic valve: mid-term haemodynamic outcomes in 1126 patients.马格纳生物瓣主动脉瓣:1126 例患者的中期血流动力学结果。
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2021 May 27;32(6):839-845. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivab016.
9
Mid-term follow-up after aortic valve replacement with the Carpentier Edwards Magna Ease prosthesis.使用Carpentier Edwards Magna Ease人工心脏瓣膜进行主动脉瓣置换术后的中期随访。
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2020 Aug 3;15(1):209. doi: 10.1186/s13019-020-01248-2.
10
Durability of bioprosthetic aortic valves in patients under the age of 60 years - rationale and design of the international INDURE registry.60岁以下患者生物瓣主动脉瓣的耐久性——国际INDURE注册研究的原理与设计
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2020 May 27;15(1):119. doi: 10.1186/s13019-020-01155-6.