Propensity-Weighted Comparison of Conventional Stented and Rapid-Deployment Aortic Bioprostheses

Abstract

Aim of this study was to compare early clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of Intuity and ME bioprostheses. A propensity score weighting approach was performed. Preoperative variables were defined according to EuroSCORE criteria and postoperative complications according to VARC-2 definitions. We evaluated 375 patients who underwent SAVR with the 2 study devices. Intuity and ME were implanted in 252 (67.2%) and in 123 (32.8%) patients, respectively. There were no differences in terms of postoperative complications, including mortality (1% in each group; OR 0.46[0.05;4.21]). The incidence of pace-maker implantation was 6% and 5% in Intuity and ME groups, respectively (OR 0.53[0.27;1.07]). Intuity showed significantly lower gradients (Median mean gradients: 9mmHg vs 14mmHg, P<0.001), larger effective orifice area index (1.13cm2/m2 vs 1cm2/m2, P=0.007) and lower incidence of patient-prosthesis mismatch (7.1% vs 22.8%, P=0.006). The RD Intuity provides similar early clinical outcomes but shows significantly better hemodynamic performance compared to the ME valve.