← 返回

Mechanical vs. sutureless aortic valve replacement: clinical outcomes and the contribution of preoperative multislice CT.

Mechanical vs. sutureless aortic valve replacement: clinical outcomes and the contribution of preoperative multislice CT.

期刊: Cardiovascular journal of Africa 日期: 2026-07-31 PMID: 42536489 DOI: 10.5830/CVJA-2026-026 浏览: 22
作者: Çoban Ö, Özsöyler İ
Ö, Ç. & İ, Ö. (2026). Mechanical vs. sutureless aortic valve replacement: clinical outcomes and the contribution of preoperative multislice CT.. Cardiovascular journal of Africa. https://doi.org/10.5830/CVJA-2026-026
Ö Ç, İ Ö. Mechanical vs. sutureless aortic valve replacement: clinical outcomes and the contribution of preoperative multislice CT.. Cardiovascular journal of Africa. 2026; doi: 10.5830/CVJA-2026-026
Ö Ç, İ Ö. Mechanical vs. sutureless aortic valve replacement: clinical outcomes and the contribution of preoperative multislice CT.[J]. Cardiovascular journal of Africa. 2026. DOI: 10.5830/CVJA-2026-026.
@article{2026,
  author = {Çoban Ö and Özsöyler İ},
  title = {Mechanical vs. sutureless aortic valve replacement: clinical outcomes and the contribution of preoperative multislice CT.},
  journal = {Cardiovascular journal of Africa},
  year = {2026},
  doi = {10.5830/CVJA-2026-026},
  note = {PMID: 42536489},
}
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Çoban Ö
AU  - Özsöyler İ
TI  - Mechanical vs. sutureless aortic valve replacement: clinical outcomes and the contribution of preoperative multislice CT.
T2  - Cardiovascular journal of Africa
PY  - 2026
DO  - 10.5830/CVJA-2026-026
AN  - PMID:42536489
ER  - 

摘要

INTRODUCTION: Heart valve disease is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, and aortic valve replacement (AVR) is a common treatment option. Recently, sutureless biological valves have gained increasing use. This study aimed to evaluate the concordance between preoperative computed tomography-derived annulus measurements and valve sizes implanted during surgery rather than the direct clinical impact of imaging on prosthesis selection. METHODS: A total of 40 patients with aortic valve stenosis who underwent elective open-heart surgery and preoperative multislice computed tomography between February 20 and May 20, 2024, were included and were randomly allocated into two groups: sutureless biological valve (n = 20) and mechanical valve (n = 20). Data were obtained from patient records and the hospital's data system and analysed statistically. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were included in the study: 20 received sutureless, rapidly implantable biological valves, and 20 underwent mechanical AVR. The mean age of the cohort was 61.5 ± 9.1 years, with 45% females and 55% males. Compared with the sutureless group, the mechanical valve group had significantly longer cross-clamp (73.5 vs. 53.0 minutes, p < 0.001) and cardiopulmonary bypass times (102 vs. 92 minutes, p = 0.011), as well as smaller sinotubular junction diameters (30.2 vs. 32.3 mm, p = 0.025). In contrast, the sutureless group demonstrated a significantly greater optimal effective orifice area index (1.58 vs. 0.77, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Preoperative computed tomography is a reliable tool for planning AVR. Sutureless biological valves provide shorter cross-clamp and bypass times and favourable haemodynamic performance, whereas mechanical valves are more often associated with smaller valve sizes and longer procedures. Early postoperative outcomes were comparable between groups.

AI 智能解读

相关文献

返回分类: 心血管 查看原文 (DOI)
已选择 0 篇文献