Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 May;66(5):247-256.
doi: 10.1007/s11748-018-0884-3. Epub 2018 Jan 10.

Biological aortic valve replacement: advantages and optimal indications of stentless compared to stented valve substitutes. A review

Affiliations
Review

Biological aortic valve replacement: advantages and optimal indications of stentless compared to stented valve substitutes. A review

Reza Tavakoli et al. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018 May.

Abstract

Controversy still surrounds the optimal biological valve substitute for aortic valve replacement. In light of the current literature, we review advantages and optimal indications of stentless compared to stented aortic bio-prostheses. Recent meta-analyses, prospective randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies comparing the most frequently used stentless and stented aortic bio-prostheses were analyzed. In the present review, the types and implantation techniques of the bio-prosthesis that are seldom taken into account by most studies and reviews were integrated in the interpretation of the relevant reports. For stentless aortic root bio-prostheses, full-root vs. sub-coronary implantation offered better early transvalvular gradients, effective orifice area and left ventricular mass regression as well as late freedom from structural valve deterioration in retrospective studies. Early mortality and morbidity did not differ between the stentless and stented aortic bio-prostheses. Early transvalvular gradients, effective orifice area and regression of left ventricular hypertrophy were significantly better for stentless, especially as full-root, compared to stented bio-prostheses. The long-term valve-related survival for stentless aortic root and Toronto SPV bio-prosthesis was as good as that for stented pericardial aortic bio-prostheses. For full-root configuration this survival advantage was statistically significant. There seems to be not one but different ideal biological valve substitutes for different subgroups of patients. In patients with small aortic root or exposed to prosthesis-patient mismatch full-root implantation of stentless bio-prostheses may better meet functional needs of individual patients. Longer follow-ups on newer generation of stented bio-prostheses are needed for comparison of their hemodynamic performance with stentless counterparts especially in full-root configuration.

Keywords: Aortic valve; Stented; Stentless; Substitute.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Circulation. 2012 Sep 11;126(11 Suppl 1):S198-204 - PubMed
    1. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007 Oct 05;2:40 - PubMed
    1. Ann Thorac Surg. 2014 Feb;97(2):544-51 - PubMed
    1. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2003 Mar;23(3):299-304 - PubMed
    1. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015 Jun;149(6):1576-7 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources