TY - JOUR

T1 - Aortic root distensibility after subcoronary stentless valve implantation

AU - Funder, Jonas A

AU - Frost, Markus W

AU - Klaaborg, Kaj-Erik

AU - Wierup, Per

AU - Hjortdal, Vibeke

AU - Nygaard, Hans

AU - Hasenkam, J Michael

PY - 2012/3

Y1 - 2012/3

N2 - BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The preservation of aortic root dynamics is considered important for the durability of aortic valve bioprostheses. Stentless heart valves are believed to support physiologic biomechanics. To date, dynamic analysis has been limited to the full root prosthesis, and exclusively in the radial direction. The study aim was to investigate and compare the radial and longitudinal aortic root distensibilities of subcoronary stentless valves, and of stented and native pig valves.METHODS: Stented pericardial (Mitroflow) or stentless (Solo, Toronto SPV) valve prostheses, or native porcine valves, were investigated in 32 pigs. Postoperatively, 12 sonomicrometry crystals were placed on the aortic root in order to measure aortic root distensibility, in both radial and longitudinal directions.RESULTS: Sonomicrometry data were obtained from 23 pigs (72%). At the annular level, the native and Solo valves were significantly more distensible in a radial direction than the Mitroflow valve (p = 0.04). However, at the level of the sinotubular junction (STJ), commissures and aorta, the native valve was significantly more distensible than all of the artificial valves (p = 0.006, p = 0.006, and p = 0.02, respectively). The Solo valve exhibited less longitudinal distensibility than the Toronto SPV and Mitroflow valves. The Toronto SPV initiated a radial expansion at the STJ significantly later in the cardiac cycle than did both the Solo and native valves (p = 0.03), but showed no difference compared to the Mitroflow valve. Longitudinal expansion between the annulus and the STJ started significantly earlier for the Solo valve than for both the Toronto SPV (p = 0.03) and Mitroflow (p = 0.02) valves.CONCLUSION: The Solo valve proved to be superior in maintaining annular distensibility immediately following implantation when compared to the Mitroflow valve. The Solo valve did not, however, preserve longitudinal distensibility as well as the other investigated valves. Finally, the Solo valve appeared to provide a more physiologic aortic root expansion pattern than its prosthetic counterparts.

AB - BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The preservation of aortic root dynamics is considered important for the durability of aortic valve bioprostheses. Stentless heart valves are believed to support physiologic biomechanics. To date, dynamic analysis has been limited to the full root prosthesis, and exclusively in the radial direction. The study aim was to investigate and compare the radial and longitudinal aortic root distensibilities of subcoronary stentless valves, and of stented and native pig valves.METHODS: Stented pericardial (Mitroflow) or stentless (Solo, Toronto SPV) valve prostheses, or native porcine valves, were investigated in 32 pigs. Postoperatively, 12 sonomicrometry crystals were placed on the aortic root in order to measure aortic root distensibility, in both radial and longitudinal directions.RESULTS: Sonomicrometry data were obtained from 23 pigs (72%). At the annular level, the native and Solo valves were significantly more distensible in a radial direction than the Mitroflow valve (p = 0.04). However, at the level of the sinotubular junction (STJ), commissures and aorta, the native valve was significantly more distensible than all of the artificial valves (p = 0.006, p = 0.006, and p = 0.02, respectively). The Solo valve exhibited less longitudinal distensibility than the Toronto SPV and Mitroflow valves. The Toronto SPV initiated a radial expansion at the STJ significantly later in the cardiac cycle than did both the Solo and native valves (p = 0.03), but showed no difference compared to the Mitroflow valve. Longitudinal expansion between the annulus and the STJ started significantly earlier for the Solo valve than for both the Toronto SPV (p = 0.03) and Mitroflow (p = 0.02) valves.CONCLUSION: The Solo valve proved to be superior in maintaining annular distensibility immediately following implantation when compared to the Mitroflow valve. The Solo valve did not, however, preserve longitudinal distensibility as well as the other investigated valves. Finally, the Solo valve appeared to provide a more physiologic aortic root expansion pattern than its prosthetic counterparts.

KW - Animals

KW - Aorta/physiology

KW - Aortic Valve

KW - Heart Valve Prosthesis

KW - Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation

KW - Myocardial Contraction

KW - Pressure

KW - Swine

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 22645853

VL - 21

SP - 181

EP - 188

JO - Journal of Heart Valve Disease

JF - Journal of Heart Valve Disease

SN - 0966-8519

IS - 2

ER -