Freedom SOLO Stentless Research Articles

Reduced Permanent Pacemaker Implantation in Patients With Stentless Freedom SOLO Compared With Stented Perimount Magna Aortic Bioprostheses: A Propensity Score Weighted Analysis

Postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR), due to new-onset severe conduction system disorders, is required in approximately 7% of patients. This study investigated the need for PPI after AVR with conventional stented Perimount Magna compared with the Freedom SOLO (FS) stentless valve (Sorin Group, Saluggia, Italy), now LivaNova plc (London, UK) that uses a strictly supra-annular, subcoronary running suture implantation technique, sparing the vulnerable interleaflet triangles in the region of the septum membranaceum. A total of 413 consecutive patients (71.4±9.2 yrs, 178 [43.1%] female) underwent isolated AVR using the stented Perimount Magna (n=264) or the stentless FS (n=149) bioprosthesis. Propensity score weighted analysis was used to account for patient-specific and procedural-specific variables, and to identify the prosthesis-specific need for early postoperative PPI within 30 days of AVR. Twenty (20) patients required PPI, which was associated with longer intensive care unit (2.1±1.7 vs 1.5±3.0 days, p<0.001) and overall hospital stays (13.8±5.2 vs 10.7±5.3 days, p<0.001) compared with no PPI. Propensity weighted logistic regression including cross-clamp times identified that use of the stented Perimount Magna was associated with increased need for PPI, as compared with the FS, with an odds ratio 5.8 (95% CI, 1.09-30.76; p=0.039). After corrections for all plausible confounders, AVR with the stented Perimount valve was associated with an odds ratio of almost 6 for an increased early postoperative need for pacemaker implantation compared with the FS stentless valve. This finding can be explained by the conventional implantation technique, which is potentially associated with mechanical trauma to the conducting system.

Is the Freedom SOLO Stentless Bioprosthesis a Useful Tool for Patients with Aortic Endocarditis and Aortic Annular Destruction?

The Freedom SOLO (FS) stentless bovine-pericardial prosthesis with a supra-annular implantation technique can be a viable option for patients with endocarditic annular destruction. We assessed early- and long-term outcomes following the use of this prosthesis in extensive aortic valve endocarditis. From 2006 to 2016, 59 patients with extensive aortic endocarditis underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) with FS (cumulative follow-up 263 patients-years) in three European centers; all patients presented annular tissue infection, while 54.3% of patients had annular abscess. Mean age was 66 ± 11 years and mean EuroSCORE I was 30.3% (standard deviation: 24.1%). In our series, 30.5% of patients had prosthetic valve endocarditis. Early mortality was 15.2% (nine patients). Estimated overall survival at 5 and 10 years was 68.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 62.8-75.0%) and 59.1% (95% CI: 66.8-81.2%), respectively. At 10-year survival, freedom from valve-related death was 83.7% (95% CI: 80.9-86.5%). No structural valve deterioration was reported in this series. Five patients (8.5%) had recurrent endocarditis during follow-up and two of them underwent reoperation. Survival freedom from reoperation and endocarditis at 10-year follow-up was 88.0% (CI: 80.4-95.6%) and 86.7% (CI: 80.5-92.9%), respectively. FS stentless bioprosthesis is a valuable and simple option to achieve AVR in patients with extensive aortic annulus endocarditis. Although in this group of complex patients, early mortality remains considerably high, late survival outcomes are comparable to the more technically demanding homografts and conventional stentless bioprostheses, with low rates of endocarditis recurrence.

Freedom Solo® versus Trifecta® bioprostheses: clinical and haemodynamic evaluation after propensity score matching.

The goal of this study was to compare the stentless Freedom Solo® (FS) and the stented Trifecta® (TF) aortic bioprostheses with regard to haemodynamic profile, left ventricular mass regression and early and late postoperative outcomes and survival. A longitudinal cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (2009-16) with either the FS or TF at 1 centre was performed. Local databases and national records were queried. Prosthesis haemodynamics and left ventricular dimensions were obtained from postoperative echocardiograms. After propensity score matching (21 covariates), the Kaplan-Meier and competing risk analyses were performed for survival and the combined outcome of structural valve deterioration and endocarditis, respectively. Haemodynamics and mass regression were assessed by a mixed-effects model including propensity score as a covariate. From a total sample of 397 patients with the FS and 525 TF bioprostheses with a median follow-up time of 4.0 (2.2-6.0) and 2.4 (1.4-3.7) years, respectively, a matched sample of 329 pairs was obtained. Matched groups showed no differences in survival (hazard ratio = 1.04, 95% confidence interval = 0.69-1.56) or cumulative hazards of combined outcome (subdistribution hazard ratio = 0.54, 95% confidence interval = 0.21-1.39). Although the TF showed an improved haemodynamic profile, no difference was found in mass regression. Patients with TF bioprostheses had higher rates of prolonged mechanical ventilation, whereas patients with the FS bioprosthesis showed higher rates of thrombocytopenia. The TF showed an improved haemodynamic profile compared to the FS, but this did not translate into further reverse remodelling. Postoperative outcomes and survival rates were comparable for both bioprostheses. Long-term follow-up is needed for comparisons with classical bioprosthesis models.

Is the Freedom Solo Stentless Bioprosthesis a Useful Tool for Patient with Aortic Endocarditis and Aortic Annular Destruction?

Is the Freedom Solo Stentless Bioprosthesis a Useful Tool for Patient with Aortic Endocarditis and Aortic Annular Destruction?

Early hemodynamics and clinical outcomes of isolated aortic valve replacement with stentless or transcatheter valve in intermediate-risk patients

ObjectiveStentless aortic valves have been developed to overcome obstructive limitations associated with stented bioprostheses. The aim of the current multi-institutional study was to compare hemodynamics of transcatheter (TAVR) and the Freedom SOLO Stentless (FS) valve in an intermediate risk population undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement. MethodsFrom 2010 to 2014, 420 consecutive patients underwent isolated surgical aortic valve replacement with FS and 375 patients underwent TAVR. Only patients with intermediate operative risk (Society of Thoracic Surgeons score 4-10) and small aortic annulus (≤23 mm) were included. After a propensity matched analysis 142 patients in each group were selected. Thirty-day postoperative clinical and echocardiographic parameters were evaluated. ResultsMean prosthesis diameter was 22.2 ± 0.9 mm for FS and 22.4 ± 1.0 mm for TAVR. In-hospital mortality was 2.1% for FS and 6.3% for TAVR (P = .02). Postoperative FS peak gradients were 19.1 ± 9.6 mm Hg (mean 10.8 ± 5.9 mm Hg); TAVR peak gradients were 20.2 ± 9.5 mm Hg (mean 10.7 ± 6.9 mm Hg) P = .57 (P = .88). Postoperative effective orifice area was 1.93 ± 0.52 cm2 for FS and 1.83 ± 0.3 cm2 for TAVR (P = .65). There was no prostheses-patient mismatch in either group. Postoperative grade 2-3 paravalvular leak was present in 3.5% for TAVR and 0.7% for FS. Postoperative permanent pacemaker implant rate was 12% for TAVR and only 1 case (0.7%) in the FS group (P < .001). ConclusionsIn patients with small aortic annulus and intermediate risk, both FS and TAVR demonstrated similar excellent hemodynamic performance. TAVR demonstrated greater mortality and rates of pacemaker insertion. Further studies are warranted to validate TAVR indications in this subset of patients.

Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve treatment of degenerative stentless supra-annular Freedom Solo valves: A single centre experience.

Redo surgery for degenerative bioprosthetic aortic valves is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Report results of valve-in-valve therapy (ViV-TAVI) in failed supra-annular stentless Freedom Solo (FS) bioprostheses, which are the highest risk for coronary occlusion. Six patients with FS valves (mean age 78.5 years, 50% males). Five had valvular restenosis (peak gradient 87.2 mm Hg, valve area 0.63 cm2 ), one had severe regurgitation (AR). Median time to failure was 7 years. Patients were high risk (mean STS/Logistic EuroScore 10.6 15.8, respectively). FS valves ranged from 21 to 25 mm. Successful ViV-TAVI was achieved in 4/6 patients (67%). Of the unsuccessful cases, (patient 1 and 2 of series) patient 1 underwent BAV with simultaneous aortography which revealed left main stem occlusion. The procedure was stopped and the patient went forward for repeat surgery. Patient 2 underwent successful ViV-TAVI with a 26-mm CoreValve with a guide catheter in the left main, but on removal coronary obstruction occurred, necessitating valve snaring into the aorta. Among the successful cases, (patients 3, 4, 5, 6) the TAVIs used were CoreValve Evolut R 23 mm (n = 3), and Lotus 23 mm (n = 1). In the successful cases the peak gradient fell from 83.0 to 38.3 mm Hg. No patient was left with >1+ AR. One patient had a stroke on Day 2, with full neurological recovery. Two patients underwent semi-elective pacing for LBBB and PR >280 ms. ViV-TAVI in stentless Freedom Solo valves is high risk. The risk of coronary occlusion is high. The smallest possible prosthesis (1:1 sizing) should be used, and strategies to protect the coronary vessels must be considered. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Midterm Follow-Up of the Stentless Freedom Solo Bioprosthesis in 350 Patients

The stentless Freedom Solo aortic bioprosthesis is implanted supraannularly using one running suture line in the sinuses of Valsalva. We report our 9-year experience with this bioprosthesis. From April 2005 to July 2014, 350 consecutive patients at our institution underwent aortic valve replacement with the Freedom Solo bioprosthesis. Follow-up and echocardiographic data were collected retrospectively from referring cardiology centers. The mean age was 76 ± 6 years, 48% were male, and 46% underwent a concomitant procedure. Median EuroSCORE II was 3.0 (interquartile range, 1.9 to 4.9). Operative mortality was 5.1% for all procedures and 2.1% for isolated aortic valve replacement. The 1-, 5-, and 9-year overall survival was 92%, 74%, and 47%, respectively. At 6 years, freedom from structural valve deterioration and freedom from aortic valve reoperation were 98% and 96%, respectively. Prosthetic valve endocarditis occurred at a rate of 0.8% per patient-year. Permanent pacemaker implantation was necessary in 2.3% (n= 8), and moderate and severe prosthesis-patient mismatch occurred in 30 patients overall (9.6%). Postoperative maximum and mean valvular gradients were 17 mm Hg and 10 mm Hg, respectively, and remained stable during follow-up. Aortic valve replacement with the Freedom Solo is safe and has a low rate of permanent pacemaker implantations and prosthesis-patient mismatch. Survival is comparable to that with other aortic bioprostheses, and structural valve deterioration and aortic valve reoperation are infrequent during midterm follow-up. Hemodynamic performance is excellent, withlow valvular gradients that remain stable during follow-up.

Stentless vs Stented Aortic Valve Bioprostheses in the Small Aortic Root

In patients with a small aortic root undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR), the Freedom SOLO bioprosthesis may be the ideal prosthesis because of its stentless design and supra-annular implantation. This study investigated if the stentless Freedom SOLO has an advantage when compared with a stented bioprosthesis in patients with a small aortic root. From April 2005-July 2014, 269 consecutive patients underwent AVR with either a Freedom SOLO (n = 76) or Mitroflow (n = 193) bioprosthesis size 19mm or 21mm, respectively. This retrospective comparison study presents clinical and echocardiographic follow-up data. In results, operative outcome and survival were similar. At 7 years, cumulative incidence of aortic valve reoperation and structural valve deterioration favor the Freedom SOLO (0% vs 7.1%, P = 0.03 and 0% vs 4.5%, P = 0.08, respectively). Additionally, the postoperative peak and mean valvular gradients favor the Freedom SOLO (21 ± 9mmHg vs 32 ± 12mmHg and 12 ± 5mmHg vs 19 ± 8mmHg, both P = <0.001, respectively). During mid-term follow-up this hemodynamic advantage continued in favor of the Freedom SOLO. Also prosthesis-patient mismatch occurred less frequently in the Freedom SOLO (28% vs 52%, P = 0.001). There were no differences in prosthetic valve endocarditis, thromboembolic, or bleeding events. In conclusion, the stentless Freedom SOLO has several significant advantages for AVR in patients with a small aortic root in comparison with a stented Mitroflow bioprosthesis. The Freedom SOLO shows superior hemodynamic performance with significantly lower valvular gradients that remained stable during mid-term follow-up. Additionally, significantly fewer prosthesis-patient mismatch occurred and the Freedom SOLO showed superior durability.

Pitfalls and premature failure of the Freedom SOLO stentless valve

This study reports a series of pitfalls, premature failures and explantation of the third-generation Freedom SOLO (FS) bovine pericardial stentless valve. A total of 149 patients underwent aortic valve replacement using the FS. Follow-up was 100% complete with an average observation time of 5.5 ± 2.3 years (maximum 8.7 years) and a total of 825 patient-years. Following intraoperative documentation, all explanted valve prostheses underwent histological examination. Freedom from structural valve deterioration (SVD) at 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 years was 92, 88, 80, 70 and 62%, respectively. Fourteen prostheses required explantation due to valve-independent dysfunction (n = 5; i.e. thrombus formation, oversizing, aortic dilatation, endocarditis and suture dehiscence) or valve-dependent failure (acute leaflet tears, n = 4 and severe stenosis, n = 5). Thus, freedom from explantation at 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 years was 95, 94, 91, 81 and 72%, respectively. An acute vertical tear along the non-coronary/right coronary commissure to the base occurred at a mean of 6.0 years (range 4.3-7.3 years) and affected size 25 and 27 prostheses exclusively. Four FS required explantation after a mean of 7.5 years (range 7.0-8.3 years) due to severe functional stenosis and gross calcification that included the entire aortic root. The FS stentless valve is safe to implant and shows satisfying mid-term results in our single institution experience. Freedom from SVD and explantation decreased markedly after only 6-7 years, so that patients with FS require close observation and follow-up. Exact sizing, symmetric positioning and observing patient limitations are crucial for optimal outcome.

The Freedom SOLO bovine pericardial stentless valve

The Freedom SOLO bovine pericardial stentless valve Olaf Stanger, Hendrik Tevaearai, Thierry Carrel Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Berne, Switzerland Abstract: The third-generation bovine pericardium Freedom SOLO (FS) stentless valve emerged in 2004 as a modified version of the Pericarbon Freedom stentless valve and as a very attractive alternative to stented bioprostheses. The design, choice of tissue, and anticalcification treatment fulfill most, if not all, requirements for an ideal valve substitute. The FS combines the single-suture, subcoronary implantation technique with the latest-generation bovine pericardial tissue and novel anticalcification treatment. The design allows imitation of the native healthy valve through unrestricted adaption to the patient&#39;s anatomy, reproducing a normal valve/root complex. However, despite hemodynamic performance superior to stented valves, we are approaching a critical observation period as superior durability, freedom from structural valve deterioration, and nonstructural failure has not been proven as expected. However, optimal performance and freedom from structural valve deterioration depend on correct sizing and perfect symmetric implantation, to ensure low leaflet stress. Any malpositioning can lead to tissue fatigue over time. Furthermore, the potential for better outcomes depends on optimal patient selection and observance of the limitations for the use of stentless valves, particularly for the FS. Clearly, stentless valve implantation techniques are less reproducible and standardized, and require surgeon-dependent experience and skill. Regardless of whether or not stentless valve durability surpasses third-generation stented bioprostheses, they will continue to play a role in the surgical repertoire. This review intends to help practitioners avoid pitfalls, observe limitations, and improve patient selection for optimal long-term outcome with the attractive FS stentless valve. Keywords: aortic valve, bioprosthesis, cardiac surgery, aortic valve replacement, tissue valve, stentless aortic valve, hemodynamics, long-term results

THE CLINICAL OUTCOME AFTER AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT WITH FREEDOM SOLO STENTLESS BIOPROSTHESIS IN NORTH AMERICA - A SINGLE CENTER EXPERIENCE

The Freedom SOLO stentless bioprosthesis has been widely used in Europe as an option for stentless aortic valve replacement. In North America however, this valve has not been broadly used. We are reporting the first short and midterm clinical outcomes of aortic valve replacement(AVR) with Freedom SOLO stentless bioprosthesis in a single North American center. This is a retrospective study using the existing database and patients charts at the University of Alberta Hospital and Mazankowski Alberta Heart Institute. From February 2011 to October 2013, 189 consecutive patients 126(66.7%) male with a mean age of 71.8±10.4 years (19-90 years) underwent aortic valve replacement with the Freedom SOLO stentless bioprosthesis. All patients were included in this study, 39 patients had isolated AVR and 150 had combined procedures. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed and significant values (p<0.05) were reported. All patients had a pre-operative and at least one postoperative echo study done. The 30 day post-operative mortality for isolated AVR and combined procedures were 0%(n=0) and 4.2%(n=8) respectively. There was no structural valve degeneration or perivalvular leaks during the entire follow up period, however mild central aortic regurgitation was found in 5(3%) patients. Mean cross-clamp time for isolated aortic valve replacement and combined procedures were 78.3±17.8min and 91.5±16.6 min respectively. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass time for isolated AVR and combined procedures were 127.2±43.2 min and 163.5±50.3 min respectively. Echocardiographic results in the immediate postoperative period showed a significant decrease in mean and peak transvalvular gradients. The mean gradient decreased from 39.4±17.5mmHg to 8.2±4.9mmHg and peak gradient decreased from 67.9±30.0mmHg to 16.7±9.7mmHg. The postoperative effective orifice area(EOA) increased from 0.87 to 1.94cm2 and the effective orifice area index (EOAi) increased from 0.45 to 1.00 cm2/m2 which were also significant. There was a significant LV mass regression (215.4 to 178.6g) that took place within six months postoperatively. Left ventricular ejection fraction was unchanged during the course of this study. At 30 days follow-up, ten patients (5.3%) had complete heart block requiring permanent pacemaker insertion. Our experience shows that the Freedom SOLO bioprosthesis has an overall good short and midterm clinical and hemodynamic outcomes.

Clinical Experience With the Freedom SOLO Stentless Aortic Valve in 277 Consecutive Patients

The Sorin Freedom SOLO (FS) bovine pericardial stentless valve prosthesis is designed for supraannular, subcoronary implantation. We report our experience and results with 277 consecutively implanted FS bioprostheses. 277 patients (mean age, 74.2 ± 7.3 years; 139 (50.2%) female) underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) with the FS stentless bioprosthesis. The hemodynamic performance was investigated with transthoracic echocardiography at discharge, 6 months later, and yearly thereafter. Follow-up was 100% complete, with an average observation time of 2.6 ± 1.7 years and a total of 697.3 patient-years. The overall 30-day mortality was 4.3%. The mortalities for isolated AVR and combined procedures were 1.9% and 7.3%, respectively. No causes of death were valve-related. Preoperative peak (74.2 ± 23.0 mm Hg) and mean (48.6 ± 16.3 mm Hg) gradients decreased to 15.6±5.4mm Hg and 8.8 ± 3.0 mm Hg postoperatively andremained unchanged for as long as 5 years. The postoperative mean effective orifice area (EOA) for valve sizes 19, 21, 23,25, and 27 were 1.49 ± 0.32 cm(2), 1.67 ± 0.40cm(2), 1.92±0.38cm(2), 2.01 ± 0.42 cm(2), and 2.13 ± 0.36 cm(2), respectively. Severe prosthesis-patient mismach (PPM) was completely absent, and moderate PPM occurred in 17patients (6.1%). In isolated AVR, 0.8% of patients with preoperative sinus rhythm required a permanent pacemaker before hospital discharge. There was 100% freedom from structural valve deterioration, 99.6 % freedom from endocarditis and reoperation, and 97.3% freedom from thromboembolism at 5 years. The FS stentless aortic valve is safe to implant, and it shows excellent hemodynamic performance and early and midterm results. Owing to the favorable EOA, the valve appears particularly attractive for patients at risk for PPM.

Successful transfemoral core valve aortic valve implantation in a patient with degenerated solofreedom biologic supravalvular aortic valve

Percutaneous aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is well established treatment option for high risp patients with severe aortic stenosis. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an attractive treatment option for patients with failing bioprostheses (valve-in-valve concept), especially in elderly patients with high risk for reoperation. Although clinical experience is still limited for this off-label indication, the procedure has been shown to be feasible in stented as well as stentless bioprostheses. We report a case of of 71-years old woman were CoreValve 23 mm (Medtronic, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA) was implanted inside a degenerated Sorin Freedom SOLO bioprosthesis using transfemoral approach. Freedom SOLO bioprosthesis stentless bioprosthesis is sutured in supra-annular position and presents a TAVI challenge due to its proximity to coronary ostia. Careful pre-procedural planning with TEE and CTA is crucial. We decided for transfemoral approach with 23 m CoreValve implantation. Balloon valvuloplasty before TAVI with contrast injection may predict the final result and is helpful for procedure success and risk reduction. The final TAVR result was good. This case proves the ViV concept for stentless Freedom SOLO bioprosthesis.

Severe Thrombocytopenia and Its Clinical Impact After Implant of the Stentless Freedom Solo Bioprosthesis

This single-center study analyzed the occurrence of severe thrombocytopenia and its clinical effect after concomitant and isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) with the stentless Freedom Solo (FS) prosthetic valve (Sorin Group, Saluggia, Italy). Between October 2009 and February 2012, 151 consecutive patients underwent AVR with a FS, either isolated (lone-FS group) or concomitant with another procedure (all-FS group). These groups were compared with 152 consecutive patients implanted with a stented Edwards Lifesciences Perimount (EP) bioprosthesis (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA). Primary end point was the incidence of severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 50 × 10(9)/L). Secondary end points were clinical outcomes, administered transfusions (red blood cells, thrombocytes, frozen plasma), and adverse events. Rinsing the FS before implantation with saline solution was also evaluated. Platelet counts were significantly lower in the all-FS and lone-FS groups than in the EP group during the first 5 days (p < 0.001). Average nadir was 102 ± 50 in lone-FS group and 130 ± 35 in lone-EP group (p < 0.001). Independent predictors for severe thrombocytopenia were FS, body surface area, and preoperative platelet count. No significant difference was found in transfusions or adverse events. Intensive care unit stay was slightly increased in the lone-FS group (p = 0.04). Rinsing the FS did not prevent thrombocytopenia. AVR with FS was associated with severe thrombocytopenia during the first postoperative days. Besides a slightly longer hospitalization in the intensive care unit in the FS group, the clinical outcome did not differ significantly, indicating thrombocytopenia was a transient and self-recovering phenomenon, not affecting clinical outcome. Rinsing the FS did not prevent thrombocytopenia.

P85 SORIN FREEDOM SOLO STENTLESS VALVE IN SURGICAL THERAPY OF AORTIC VALVE ENDOCARDITIS: INITIAL RESULTS AND MID–TERM FOLLOWUP

Background: Despite significant improvement in antibiotic therapy, aortic valve endocarditis, with or without perivalvular abscess, still represents significant surgical challenge. Homograft implantation is the gold standard of surgical therapy, but new artificial valves attract more attention due to easier availability. We present our results in utilizing the Sorin Freedom SOLO stentless aortic valve in surgical management of aortic valve endocarditis. Methods: From January 2009 until January 2013, seventeen male patients underwent aortic valve replacement due to aortic valve endocarditis utilizing the Sorin Freedom SOLO bioprosthesis made of bovine pericardium. Follow-up and postoperative echo data were collected in a prospective manner. Results: There were 9 emergent surgeries (56%), 5 urgent (31%), and 2 elective (13%). Average age was 61.5±8.74 years (range 43–76) with median EuroSCORE 10, and logistic EuroSCORE mortality 23.09±20.09% (4.4–59.7%). One patient underwent concomitant mitral valve replacement, and four patients had annular abscesses which were closed with glutaraldehyde treated autologous pericardium. Average aortic cross-clamp time for isolated aortic valve replacement was 58.81±19.25 minutes (42–98), and for combined procedures (mitral valve replacement, closure of subannular abscess) 112.8±22.6 minutes (82–141). Median valve size was 25mm (23–27). Follow up was 18.98±14.49 months (0.1–43.86). Two patients died during hospital stay due to multi-organ failure, and one died during mid-term follow-up, for an overall mortality of 18%. Early mean postoperative transvalvular gradient was 11.22±4.36 mmHg(7– 15.8), and medium-term gradient was 12.5±5.6 mmHg. During follow-up, there were neither structural valve deterioration of any kind nor prosthetic valve endocarditis. Conclusion: Because of its specific implantation technique with single supra- annular suture line, and absence of any artificial material in its design, Sorin Freedom SOLO stentless bioprosthesis is a valuable tool in surgical management of aortic valve endocarditis. Although our initial results are encouraging, further follow-up is necessary.

Thrombocytopenia and perioperative complications after stentless Freedom Solo valve implantation

Freedom Solo (FS) stentless bioprostheses have superior haemodynamic performance compared to stented valves; however, the data of thrombocytopenia after FS implantations is disturbing. To compare platelet count and perioperative complications between stentless and stented biological valves in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. In 29 patients, FS bovine valves (Sorin Group, Saluggia, Italy) were implanted. Platelet counts were analysed before surgery, on the day of operation, on four consecutive postoperative days (POD) as well as at discharge, and compared to 29 control patients with biological stented porcine valves (Labcor Laboratorios TLBP-A Supra). The analysis of the perioperative variables extracorporeal circulation (ECC), aortic cross clamping (XC) and mechanical ventilation times, as well as blood supply, was performed. Initial platelet counts were comparable in both groups. In the FS group, platelet levels on the four consecutive POD were significantly lower. The lowest platelet value (13 × 10³/μL), related to fatal thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, was found in one patient from the FS group. ECC as well as XC and mechanical ventilation times, were significantly longer in the FS group, and more blood transfusions in these patients were required. In multiple regression analysis, ECC and XC times did not correlate with platelet count. Implantations of FS stentless bioprostheses are related to significantly lower platelet counts. Severe perioperative complications and their relation to thrombocytopenia need further evaluation.

Aortic Valve Replacement Performed Twice Through Ministernotomy 15 Years After Lung Transplantation

After transplantation, steroids and calcineurin inhibitors together with end-stage renal failure may lead to associated cardiovascular diseases, particularly in long-term survivors. We present a case of aortic valve replacement 15 years after lung transplantation, followed by reoperative valve replacement for late infective endocarditis. Lung compliance and gas exchange were excellent during recovery. Despite adequate prophylaxis, immunosuppression and hemodialysis likely contributed to repeated episodes of sepsis, which caused detachment of the first aortic prosthesis. Despite the high mortality of prosthetic valve endocarditis, the postoperative course was uneventful and the patient is doing well at 24-month follow-up.