Stentless aortic valves as an alternative to homografts for valve replacement in active infective endocarditis complicated by ring abscess

BACKGROUND: The valve substitute of choice in active infective aortic valve endocarditis complicated by annulus abscess in our institution is the cryopreserved homograft. To avoid implantation of any prosthetic material, the Shelhigh No-React stentless valves and conduits may be considered an alternative when no suitable homograft is available. METHODS: Between March 1986 and January 2001, 452 homografts were implanted in the aortic position. From January 2000 to August 2001, 75 Shelhigh No-React prostheses were implanted at our institution. In 25 consecutive patients (study group) with aortic annulus abscess, urgent aortic valve replacement with the Shelhigh SuperStentless and Stentless Aortic Valve Conduit was undertaken. Patients (16 male, 9 female; age, 49 +/- 19 years) were studied with follow-up until March 2002. The control group comprised 68 consecutive historical patients (46 male, 22 female; age, 53 +/- 14.4 years) with similar disease treated between January 1997 and December 1999 in whom an aortic homograft was implanted. This group was also followed up until March 2002. Demographic data and preoperative characteristics of the patients were without significant differences. Patients were studied by echocardiography. RESULTS: Sixty-day mortality was 16% (11 patients) in the control group compared with 12% (3 patients) in the study group. Recurrent infection occurred in 4% in both groups. The instantaneous and mean Doppler gradients yielded no significant differences (19.4 +/- 10.4 mm Hg and 11.8 +/- 5.7 mm Hg versus 18.2 +/- 8.7 mm Hg and 10.9 +/- 5.3 mm Hg, respectively). The mean effective orifice area calculated from Doppler flow velocity for the stentless valve was 2.3 +/- 0.6 cm2. Preoperative evaluation of left ventricular dimensions and global left ventricular systolic function did not vary significantly between the two groups. However, postoperatively evaluated left ventricular end-diastolic diameter dimensions in the study group were significantly smaller than those in the control group (47.6 +/- 7.9 mm versus 56 +/- 9.5 mm; p = 0.05). Ejection fraction was similar in both groups (56.2% +/- 12.8% for the study [Shelhigh] and 52.6% +/- 16.8% for the control [homograft] group). CONCLUSIONS: Our experience with both the Shelhigh No-React SuperStentless and Stentless Aortic Valve Conduit in patients with native or prosthetic aortic valve endocarditis appears to demonstrate good results, similar to those of cryopreserved homografts. Ease of implantation and favorable effective orifice area and pressure gradients, as well as the No-React anticalcification treatment, are promising factors.