Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sutureless valves—are we there yet? Evidence from the PERSIST-AVR trial

  • Critical Appraisal of Trials
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sutur eless valves have emerged as another option for implantation of a biological valve. Several benefits of sutureless valves have been reported in the literature. However, concerns have been raised over increased incidence of para-valvular leak and need for permanent pacemaker implantation. Most of the evidence has been obtained from observational and retrospective single institutional series. The Perceval Sutureless Implant Versus Standard-Aortic Valve Replacement (PERSIST-AVR) trial is the first multicentric randomized control trial to compare sutureless valves with standard bio-prosthesis. Evidence from this trial has been critically analyzed in this review.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fischlein T, Folliguet T, Meuris B, et al. Sutureless versus conventional bioprostheses for aortic valve replacement in severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021;161:920–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 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;49:709–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lim C-Y, In J. Randomization in clinical studies. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2019;72:221–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Meco M, Montisci A, Miceli A, et al. Sutureless Perceval aortic valve versus conventional stented bioprostheses: meta-analysis of postoperative and midterm results in isolated aortic valve replacement. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7:e006091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dedeilias P, Baikoussis NG, Prappa E, Asvestas D, Argiriou M, Charitos C. Aortic valve replacement in elderly with small aortic root and low body surface area; the Perceval S valve and its impact in effective orifice area. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016;11:54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ensminger S, Fujita B, Bauer T, et al. Rapid deployment versus conventional bioprosthetic valve replacement for aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71:1417–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sohn SH, Kang Y, Kim JS, Choi JW, Jang M-J, Hwang HY. Direct comparison of rapid deployment versus sutureless aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis. J Thorac Dis. 2021;13:2203–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sohn SH, Jang M-J, Hwang HY, Kim KH. Rapid deployment or sutureless versus conventional bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018;155:2402-2412.e5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Muneretto C, Alfieri O, Cesana BM, et al. A comparison of conventional surgery, transcatheter aortic valve replacement, and sutureless valves in “real-world” patients with aortic stenosis and intermediate- to high-risk profile. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;150:1570–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Rabindranath Tagore International Institute of Cardiac Sciences, Narayana Health, 124, EM Bypass, Mukundapur, Kolkata, 700099, India

    Pradeep Narayan

Authors
  1. Pradeep Narayan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pradeep Narayan.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval and informed consent

Not required as this is a review article.

Conflict of interest

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Narayan, P. Sutureless valves—are we there yet? Evidence from the PERSIST-AVR trial. Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 38, 108–110 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12055-021-01289-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12055-021-01289-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation