Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 8, 2025
Standardized Technique of Aortic Valve Re-implantation for Valve-sparing Aortic Root Replacement
Published on: December 11, 2017
Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis versus Trifecta sutured bioprosthesis for aortic valve replacement: immediate
Paolo Nardi1, Claudia Altieri2, Calogera Pisano1
1Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgical Sciences, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Introduction:
The Perceval sutureless biological prosthesis for aortic valve replacement has been introduced with the rationale for shortening surgical, extracorporeal circulation and aortic cross-clamping times, in order to reduce postoperative complications.
Aim:
To evaluate early hemodynamic performance and immediate outcomes of implantation of the Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis in comparison with the St. Jude Trifecta sutured bioprosthesis for aortic valve replacement (Perfecta study).
Material And Methods:
Between December 2014 and June 2023, 281 patients underwent St. Jude Trifecta implantation (n = 220, mean age: 75.2 ±6.5 years) and Perceval implantation, when indicated (n = 61, mean age: 77.9 ±5.1 years). Concomitant CABG was performed in 73 (33%) and in 27 (44%) patients, respectively.
Results:
Extracorporeal circulation and cross-clamp times were significantly shorter in Perceval patients in all aortic valve replacements (61 ±23 and 49 ±18 minutes vs. 96 ±36 and 67 ±21 minutes), and in isolated procedures (54 ±10 and 43 ±8 minutes vs. 84 ±28 and 66 ±21 minutes) (p < 0.0001, for all comparisons). Operative mortality was absent and 2.7%, respectively (p = 0.2). Postoperatively, low output cardiac syndrome (0% vs. 4.5%) and total rate of major cardiac and non-cardiac related complications (6.6% vs. 18.6%) were significantly lower in Perceval patients (p = 0.01). Echocardiography at discharge in comparison with preoperatively showed a relevant and similar decrease of mean and peak trans-aortic valve gradients for the Trifecta prosthesis (11.6 ±4.3 vs. 50 ±15.2 mm Hg; 21.6 ±7.3 vs. 78.8 ±24 mm Hg) and for the Perceval prosthesis (12.6 ±4.8 vs. 52 ±12.5 mm Hg; 22.6 ±7.9 vs. 77.8 ±16 mm Hg) (p < 0.00001, for all comparisons). Better global cardiac function was observed in Perceval patients. Concomitant multi-vessel and left main coronary artery disease (p = 0.046; HR = 4.6) and chronic pulmonary disease (p = 0.006; HR = 5.6) were detected as independent predictors of death and postoperative major complications.
Conclusions:
Early hemodynamic performance appears to be satisfactory with the use of Trifecta sutured and Perceval sutureless bioprostheses. Perceval implantation allows reduction of surgical times, better preservation of myocardial contractile function and, consequently, reduction of the risk of postoperative complications.
