Stentless aortic valve replacement with Freestyle or Toronto SPV: an early comparison.
BACKGROUND
Stentless aortic xenograft valves have been developed to overcome the disadvantages of conventional stented prostheses. We have implanted two new aortic bioprostheses: the Medtronic Freestyle and the St. Jude Toronto SPV. Early results are compared.


METHODS
Forty-four Freestyle valves were implanted using a freestanding total root technique. Fourteen subcoronary Toronto SPV bioprostheses were implanted. Sixty-four percent of both groups (28 of 44 Freestyle and 9 of 14 Toronto SPV) underwent concurrent procedures.


RESULTS
Ischemic time was 117 +/- 21 minutes for Freestyle and 124 +/- 19 minutes for Toronto SPV. There were no operative deaths or valve-related reoperations. Aortic valve area was 1.83 +/- 0.51 cm2 for Freestyle and 1.80 +/- 0.51 cm2 (p = 0.89) for Toronto SPV. Transvalvular gradient was 8.03 +/- 4.09 mm Hg for Freestyle and 12.4 +/- 1.82 mm Hg (p = 0.002) for the Toronto SPV. Aortic regurgitation was not experienced in any Freestyle patients, while Toronto SPV patients were graded as none to trace 79% (11 of 14), mild 14% (2 of 14), and moderate 7% (1 of 14).


CONCLUSIONS
Aortic valve replacement with the Freestyle and Toronto SPV required equal time for implantation and had equal effective orifice areas. Freestyle had lower transvalvular gradient and less aortic insufficiency without increasing morbidity or mortality.
Riley
R D
RD
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157, USA.
Hammon
J W
JW
Adair
S M
SM
Cordell
A R
AR
Kon
N D
ND
D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001021:Aortic Valve; D001705:Bioprosthesis; D005260:Female; D006350:Heart Valve Prosthesis; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011474:Prosthesis Design