Early surgical outcomes of rapid deployment aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valves.

BACKGROUND

Biological valve prostheses in rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement (RD AVR) procedures have demonstrated excellent outcomes. However, previous studies indicate a lack of specific surgical outcomes for the bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) or recommend RD AVR implementation. The existing literature comparing the clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of patients with BAV and those with tricuspid aortic valves (TAVs) after RD AVR is limited. Therefore, this study evaluated the safety and feasibility of RD AVR in BAV, including Sievers type 0, and compared the early clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of patients who underwent RD AVR at a single center based on aortic valve type.

METHODS

Our institution officially commenced performing RD AVR using Intuity valves in September 2022. The medical records of 80 patients who underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) between September 1, 2022, and July 31, 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. In this set, 30 patients underwent RD AVR for aortic stenosis. Among the 30 RD AVR cases, groups A and B comprised 16 (53.3%) patients with TAV and 14 (46.7%) with BAV, respectively. The preoperative characteristics and postoperative echocardiographic data were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences in preoperative characteristics, including mean age and sex distribution, were found between groups A and B. Notably, no patient in both groups exhibited mild- or higher-grade aortic regurgitation. The postoperative transvalvular mean pressure gradients showed significantly lower values in group B than in group A (12.20±4.64 16.26±5.49 mmHg, P=0.03). The necessity to insert a permanent pacemaker was not found in any of the patients (0%) in group A but was found in one (7.1%) patient in group B (P=0.46). Among the BAV cases, six (20%) were categorized as Sievers type 0. Of the 14 patients in group B, six with Sievers type 0 and the remaining eight with other bicuspid valve types were designated as groups B0 and B1, respectively. Similarly, no significant difference in postoperative transvalvular mean pressure gradient was observed between the two groups (11.33±4.49 12.86±4.94 mmHg, P=0.56). No in-hospital mortality was observed among all 30 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, RD AVR was considered feasible in a small, carefully selected cohort of patients with aortic stenosis, even in BAV, including Sievers type 0, as observed from the standpoint of postoperative hemodynamic outcomes and the incidence of aortic regurgitation.