Download PDF
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2026; 74(02): 083-091
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1790240
Original Cardiovascular

Pathology-Independent Expansion of Indications for Rapid-Deployment Aortic Valve Replacement: Midterm Outcomes

Authors

  • Seon Yong Bae 

    1   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Kyung Hwan Kim    *

    1   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Suk Ho Sohn   *

    1   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Yoonjin Kang

    1   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Ji Seong Kim

    1   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Jae Woong Choi

    1   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints All articles of this category

Abstract

Background

This study evaluated the midterm outcomes of rapid deployment aortic valve replacement (RDAVR) performed regardless of pathology for various aortic valve diseases at a single center.

Methods

Of the 344 patients who underwent RDAVR using Edwards INTUITY during the study period at our institution, 176 had bicuspid valve diseases (51.2%), 20 had pure aortic regurgitation (5.8%), and 4 had infective endocarditis (1.2%). Median follow-up duration was 28.6 months (maximum: 86.4 months). Midterm clinical outcomes were evaluated, and the changes of valve hemodynamics from early postoperative period to 5 years after surgery were also investigated.

Results

Mean age was 68.9 ± 9.8 years, and 46.2% of the patients were female. Isolated RDAVR was performed in 90 patients (26.2%), and concomitant procedures, including aortic surgery (48.8%), mitral valve surgery (20.3%), arrhythmia surgery (9.0%), tricuspid valve surgery (7.0%), and coronary artery bypass grafting (5.5%), were performed in 254 patients (73.8%). Operative mortality occurred in 11 patients (3.2%), and permanent pacemaker implantation was required in 5 patients (1.5%) in early postoperative period. Overall survival rate was 86.9% at 5 years, and cumulative incidence of cardiac death was 6.3% at 5 years. No deterioration of valve hemodynamics was observed at midterm echocardiographic evaluation in either the overall population or for each size of valve.

Conclusion

Isolated or concomitant aortic valve replacement using rapid-deployment valves was performed for various aortic valve diseases regardless of the underlying pathology at our institution, and the clinical and hemodynamic outcomes were excellent for up to 5 years.

Keywords

aortic valve replacement - rapid-deployment valve - outcomes - hemodynamics

Note

Scientific Meeting, April 25–26, 2024, Aortic symposium 2024, Sheraton New York Times Square Hotel, New York, United States.


Ethical Approval Statement

09/04/2023, H-2308-168-1461 by Seoul National University Hospital Biomedical Research Institute.


Informed Consent Statement

The study protocol was reviewed by the Institutional Review Board and approved as a minimal risk retrospective study, and the requirement for individual consent was waived.


Data Availability Statement

The deidentified participant data will not be shared. However, if there is a proper request, it can be shared. Please directly contact the corresponding author to request data sharing.


* These authors contributed equally to the study.




Publication History

Received: 09 May 2024

Accepted: 12 August 2024

Article published online:
21 January 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Yerasi C, Rogers T, Forrestal BJ. et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in young, low-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2021; 14 (11) 1169-1180
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 2 Rahmouni K, Buchko M, Boodhwani M. et al. Aortic stenosis in the low-risk patient: overview of the management options and possible permutations. Can J Cardiol 2022; 38 (06) 836-839
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 3 McClure RS, McGurk S, Cevasco M. et al. Late outcomes comparison of nonelderly patients with stented bioprosthetic and mechanical valves in the aortic position: a propensity-matched analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 148 (05) 1931-1939
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 4 Laufer G, Haverich A, Andreas M. et al. Long-term outcomes of a rapid deployment aortic valve: data up to 5 years. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2017; 52 (02) 281-287
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 5 Sohn SH, Jang MJ, Hwang HY, Kim KH. Rapid deployment or sutureless versus conventional bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2018; 155 (06) 2402-2412.e5
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 6 Sohn SH, Kim KH, Kang Y, Kim JS, Choi JW, Hwang HY. Rapid deployment versus its conventional counterpart in aortic valve replacement: comparison of early hemodynamic outcomes. J Thorac Dis 2023; 15 (07) 3673-3684
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 7 Barnhart GR, Accola KD, Grossi EA. et al; TRANSFORM Trial Investigators. TRANSFORM (Multicenter Experience With Rapid Deployment Edwards INTUITY Valve System for Aortic Valve Replacement) US clinical trial: performance of a rapid deployment aortic valve. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2017; 153 (02) 241-251.e2
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 8 Sohn SH, Kim KH, Kang Y, Kim JS, Choi JW. Recovery from conduction abnormalities after aortic valve replacement using Edwards intuity. Ann Thorac Surg 2021; 112 (04) 1356-1362
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 9 Akins CW, Miller DC, Turina MI. et al; Councils of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, European Assoication for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Ad Hoc Liaison Committee for Standardizing Definitions of Prosthetic Heart Valve Morbidity. Guidelines for reporting mortality and morbidity after cardiac valve interventions. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008; 135 (04) 732-738
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 10 Williams ML, Flynn CD, Mamo AA. et al. Long-term outcomes of sutureless and rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 2020; 9 (04) 265-279
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 11 Herry M, Laghlam D, Touboul O. et al. Pacemaker implantation after aortic valve replacement: rapid-deployment Intuity® compared to conventional bioprostheses. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2020; 58 (02) 335-342
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 12 Levack MM, Kapadia SR, Soltesz EG. et al. Prevalence of and risk factors for permanent pacemaker implantation after aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2019; 108 (03) 700-707
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 13 Pollari F, Berretta P, Albertini A. et al. Pacemaker after sutureless and rapid-deployment prostheses: a progress report from the SURD-IR. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2023; 71 (07) 557-565
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 14 Coti I, Schukro C, Drevinja F. et al. Conduction disturbances following surgical aortic valve replacement with a rapid-deployment bioprosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2021; 162 (03) 803-811
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Miceli A, Berretta P, Fiore A. et al. Sutureless and rapid deployment implantation in bicuspid aortic valve: results from the sutureless and rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement international registry. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 2020; 9 (04) 298-304
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 16 King M, Stambulic T, Payne D, Fernandez AL, El-Diasty M. The use of sutureless and rapid-deployment aortic valve prosthesis in patients with bicuspid aortic valve: a focused review. J Card Surg 2022; 37 (10) 3355-3362
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 17 Chiariello GA, Villa E, Messina A, Troise G. Dislocation of a sutureless prosthesis after type I bicuspid aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2018; 156 (02) e87-e89
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 18 Gersak B, Fischlein T, Folliguet TA. et al. Sutureless, rapid deployment valves and stented bioprosthesis in aortic valve replacement: recommendations of an International Expert Consensus Panel. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2016; 49 (03) 709-718
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 19 Laufer G. The 10 commandments of rapid deployment intuity valve implantation. Innovations (Phila) 2023; 18 (04) 316-319
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 20 Im S, Kim KH, Sohn SH, Kang Y, Kim JS, Choi JW. Comparable outcomes of bicuspid aortic valves for rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement. J Chest Surg 2023; 56 (06) 435-444
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 21 Caporali E, Lorusso R, Torre T. et al. The aortic annulus stabilization technique prevents paravalvular leaks after rapid deployment aortic valve implantation. J Clin Med 2021; 10 (24) 5776
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 22 Yun T, Kim KH, Sohn SH, Kang Y, Kim JS, Choi JW. Rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement in a real-world all-comers population. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2023; 71 (07) 511-518
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 23 Belyaev S, Herrmann FEM, Dashkevich A. et al. Evaluation of a rapid deployment prosthesis strategy for the treatment of aortic valve endocarditis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2022; 61 (05) 1109-1115
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 24 Romano MA, Koeckert M, Mumtaz MA. et al; TRANSFORM Trial Investigators. Permanent pacemaker implantation after rapid deployment aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2018; 106 (03) 685-690
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 25 Capelli C, Corsini C, Biscarini D. et al. Pledget-armed sutures affect the haemodynamic performance of biologic aortic valve substitutes: a preliminary experimental and computational study. Cardiovasc Eng Technol 2017; 8 (01) 17-29
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 26 Sadri V, Bloodworth IV CH, Madukauwa-David ID, Midha PA, Raghav V, Yoganathan AP. A mechanistic investigation of the EDWARDS INTUITY Elite valve's hemodynamic performance. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2020; 68 (01) 9-17
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 27 Andreas M, Wallner S, Habertheuer A. et al. Conventional versus rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement: a single-centre comparison between the Edwards Magna valve and its rapid-deployment successor. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2016; 22 (06) 799-805
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 28 Coti I, Haberl T, Scherzer S. et al. Outcome of rapid deployment aortic valves: long-term experience after 700 implants. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 2020; 9 (04) 314-321
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 29 Coti I, Haberl T, Scherzer S. et al. Rapid-deployment aortic valves for patients with a small aortic root: a single-center experience. Ann Thorac Surg 2020; 110 (05) 1549-1556
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 30 Nazif TM, Dizon JM, Hahn RT. et al; PARTNER Publications Office. Predictors and clinical outcomes of permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the PARTNER (Placement of AoRtic TraNscathetER Valves) trial and registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2015; 8 (1, Pt A): 60-69
    Search in Google Scholar