Aortic valve replacement AVR is the treatment of choice for aortic valve disease, with excellent results reported in the short- and long-term follow-up. Due to the increasing number of patient comorbidities and older age, various technical alternatives have been developed such as transcatheter aortic valve implantation and, more recently, sutureless valve bioprostheses. For patients with very high surgical risk, transcatheter implantation is becoming the top therapeutic option.
However, the percutaneous technique still has major disadvantages including those related to implantation without excision of the diseased native valve without direct view of the annulus, which increases the probability of developing perivalvular leaks and a high percentage of atrioventricular block. Due to the need for aggressive crimping of pericardial layers, there is uncertainty about their long-term durability.
A new technique for AVR using sutureless bioprosthesis has recently been developed. The main advantages of this technique are the excellent haemodynamic performance and fast deployment under direct view, thereby avoiding the knotting of surgical stitches, which is especially advantageous in more technically demanding procedures e.
The good clinical results of these valves have been supported by scientific evidence, making it a feasible option for patients who are candidates for AVR using biologic prosthesis, especially for those with mid-high surgical risk for standard AVR and percutaneous transcatheter valve implantation.
In this article, we review the latest evidence on these new prostheses, including their advantages and possible disadvantages. Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide.
