Abstract
The INSPIRIS RESILIA aortic bioprosthesis (Edwards Lifesciences LLC, Irvine, USA) was fixed in novel tissue preservation technology to ensure long-term durability. Hemodynamic performance after aortic valve replacement (AVR) for severe aortic stenosis (AS) has not been published in the Japanese cohort. Twenty-nine patients underwent AVR with INSPIRIS RESILIA bioprosthesis for severe AS between November 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020. The mean age was 75.1 ± 4.5 years with 19 female patients. Body surface area was 1.58 ± 0.19 m2 and New York Heart Association functional class was 2.2 ± 0.5. Hemodynamic performance was assessed using follow-up transthoracic echocardiographic data collected at 3–6 months, 1 year and 2 years. The mean follow-up time was 19.2 ± 7.2 months, with a 100% follow-up rate. One patient died of postoperative heart failure. The preoperative mean and peak transvalvular pressure gradients (PGs) were 51.9 ± 18.4 mmHg and 89.3 ± 34.9 mmHg, respectively, and effective orifice area 0.72 ± 0.26 cm2. They improved at 10.2 ± 3.5 mmHg (p < 0.0001), 19.3 ± 6.6 mmHg (p < 0.0001) and 1.73 ± 0.47cm2 (p < 0.0001) at discharge. The mean transvalvular PG at 3–6 months (n = 24), 1 year (n = 25) and 2 years (n = 15) was 11.2 ± 3.8 mmHg (p < 0.0001), 11.1 ± 3.2 mmHg (p < 0.0001) and 11.2 ± 3.3 mmHg (p < 0.0001), respectively. Left ventricular mass index decreased from 123.0 ± 35.0 g/m2 before surgery to 113.4 ± 35.0 g/m2 (p = 0.0133) at discharge. It has dropped to 88.0 ± 25.0 g/m2 (p = 0.0007) at 2 years. Constrictive pericarditis caused heart failure in one patient. INSPIRIS RESILIA bioprosthesis showed improved hemodynamic performance in the early postoperative phase. There were fewer valve-related events observed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Isaacs AJ, Shuhaiber J, Salemi A, Isom OW, Sedrakyan A. National trends in utilization and in-hospital outcomes of mechanical versus bioprosthetic aortic valve replacements. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;149:1262–9.
Schoen FJ, Levy RJ. Calcification of tissue heart valve substitutes: progress toward understanding and prevention. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;79:1072–80.
Fukunaga N, Matsuo T, Saji Y, Imai Y, Koyama T. Mitral valve stenosis progression due to severe calcification on glutaraldehyde-treated autologous pericardium: word of caution for an attractive repair technique. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;99:2203–5.
Flameng W, Hermans H, Verbeken E, Meuris B. A randomized assessment of an advanced tissue preservation technology in the juvenile sheep model. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;149:340–5.
Shang H, Claessens SM, Tian B, Wright GA. Aldehyde reduction in a novel pericardial tissue reduces calcification using rabbit intramascular model. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2017;28:16.
Bourguignon T, et al. Very long-term outcomes of the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount valve in aortic position. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;99:831–7.
Puskas JD, et al. The COMMENCE trial: 2-year outcomes with an aortic bioprosthesis with RESILIA tissue. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;52:432–9.
Johnston DR, Griffith BP, Puskas JD, Bavaria JE, Svensson LG, COMMENCE Trial Investigators. Intermediate-term outcomes of aortic valve replacement using a bioprosthesis with a novel tissue. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021 (in press).
Dalmau MJ, et al. Hemodynamic performance of the Medtronic Mosaic and Perimount Magna aortic bioprostheses: five-year results of a prospectively randomized study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011;39:844–52.
Bartus K, et al. Final 5-year outcomes following aortic valve replacement with a RESILIA tissue bioprosthesis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2021;59:434–41.
Christakis GT, Joyner CD, Morgan CD. Left ventricular mass regression early after aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg. 1996;62:1084–9.
Une D, Mesana L, Chan V. Clinical impact of changes in left ventricular function after aortic valve replacement: analysis from 3112 patients. Circulation. 2015;132:741–7.
Helder MR, et al. The effect of postoperative medical treatment on left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;149:781–6.
Mihalijevic T, et al. Survival after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: implications for decision making. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008;135:1270–8.
Gaudino M, et al. Survival after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: does left ventricular mass regression have a clinical correlate? Eur Heart J. 2005;26:51–7.
Taniguchi K, et al. Left ventricular mass: impact on left ventricular contractile function and its reversibility in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007;32:588–95.
Funding
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This abstract was accepted at The 122nd Annual Congress of Japan Surgical Society, Kumamoto, Japan, 2022.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fukunaga, N., Yoshida, S., Shimoji, A. et al. Hemodynamic performance of INSPIRIS RESILIA aortic bioprosthesis for severe aortic stenosis: 2-year follow-up in Japanese cohort. J Artif Organs 25, 323–328 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10047-022-01316-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10047-022-01316-5