Browsing by Subject "Bioprosthesis"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Open Access
    Long term behavior of biological prostheses used as abdominal wall substitutes
    (F. Hernández y Juan F. Madrid. Universidad de Murcia. Departamento de Biología Celular e Histología, 2014) Pascual, G.; Sotomayor, S.; Pérez-López, P.; Buján, J.; Bellón, J.M.
    Background. Despite their degradation in the host organism, the benefits of collagen bioprostheses remain unclear. This study addresses the absorption and long-term host tissue incorporation of several collagen biomeshes. Material and methods. Partial ventral hernial defects created in the abdominal wall of rabbits were repaired using the crosslinked meshes Permacol® or CollaMend®, or the non-crosslinked Surgisis®, Tutomesh® or Strattice®. After 90 and 180 days of implant, morphological studies and morpho-metric analysis of the thickness of the meshes were performed. Immunofluorescence confocal microscopy combined with differential interference contrast (DIC) imaging was used to distinguish newly formed collagen from that comprising the mesh. The macrophage response was examined by immunohisto-chemistry. Results. At 90 days, the thinner non-crosslinked biomeshes Tutomesh and Surgisis were more fully degraded with much of their collagen replaced with loose connective tissue. By 180 days, both implants had been practically fully absorbed. In contrast, in Strattice only the outermost third was infiltrated by neoformed tissue. On both surfaces of the crosslinked meshes, a fibrous capsule with host cells lining its perimeter was observed at both time points, though at 180 days these cells had penetrated the mesh interior. At both implant times, Strattice showed the higher expression of collagen type I while collagen III expression was similar for all the meshes. The non-crosslinked materials elicited lower macrophage counts at both time points, significantly so for Strattice. The macrophage response decreased over time for all the meshes but Surgisis. Conclusions. Strattice, the thicker, more compacted non-crosslinked mesh showed the best balance between tissue incorporation and absorption while eliciting a minimal foreign-body reaction in the long-term.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Restricted
    Risk factors for postoperative pacemaker implantation after rapid deployment aortic valve replacement: results from the RADAR registry
    (Springer, 2021-03-04) González Barbeito, Miguel; Vazquez, Alejandro; Carnero, Manuel; Sarralde, José Aurelio; Cal Purriños, Natalia; Cánovas López, Sergio; Martoto, Luis; Gutiérrez, Francisco; Hornero, Fernando; Bautista Hernández, Victor; Arribas Leal, José María; Cirugía, Pediatría y Obstetricia y Ginecología
    Introduction: Rapid deployment aortic valve replacement has been recently introduced in clinical practice. Different studies have reported a significant reduction in surgical times with excellent hemodynamic profiles and short-term results. However, an increase in permanent pacemaker requirements compared with conventional aortic valve replacement has been described. Nevertheless, risk factors for postoperative pacemaker implantation are not well known. The aim of this study is to report our early outcomes with rapid deployment aortic valve replacement within the RADAR Registry, especially focusing on risk factors for postoperative pacemaker implantation. Methods: Between April 2012 and January 2016, 164 patients undergoing isolated or combined aortic valve replacement with Edwards INTUITY Elite (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) were included in the RADAR Registry. Pre-, intra- and postoperative clinical data results and complications were recorded, especially focusing on risk factors for the development of postoperative complete or high-grade AV block requiring pacemaker implantation. Patients were followed up for up to 1 year with evaluation of clinical and echocardiographic outcomes. Results: A total of 164 consecutive patients were included in this study, where 128 patients (78.05%) had an isolated aortic valve replacement (group 1) and 36 (21.95%) a concomitant procedure (group 2). The surgical approach was ministernotomy in 61 patients (37.20%) and median sternotomy in 100 patients (60.98%). Complications with valve implantation were observed in three patients. Postoperative complete or high-degree AV block requiring a permanent pacemaker implantation developed in ten patients (6.9%). Seven patients died in-hospital (4.27%). No significant differences between groups were found in terms of stroke, postoperative infection, mortality, atrial fibrillation and postoperative atrioventricular block. Seven patients presented acute renal impairment (5.51%) in group 1 versus seven patients (20%) in group 2 (p = 0.007). In multivariate analysis, low weight and preoperative arrhythmia (atrial fibrillation, bifascicular block, left bundle branch block) emerged as risk factors for postoperative AV block requiring a pacer. In median follow-up of 1 year, seven (4.27%) patients died, and no cases of structural valve deterioration or endocarditis were observed. Significant patient-prosthesis mismatch was found in seven (4.27%) patients. Conclusion: Initial experience with rapid deployment aortic valve replacement in the RADAR Registry demonstrates low rates of implantation complications and good perioperative and 1-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes. Incidence of postoperative AV block requiring a pacer correlated with low weight and preoperative arrythmias (atrial fibrillation, bifascicular block and left bundle branch block). Avoidance of oversizing and careful consideration of implantation of this technology in patients with pre-existing arrythmias could minimize the risk for postoperative pacemaker implantation.