Propensity-weighted comparison of conventional stented and rapid-deployment aortic bioprostheses

Aim of this study was to compare early clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of Intuity and ME bioprostheses. A propensity score weighting approach was performed. Preoperative variables were defined according to EuroSCORE criteria and postoperative complications according to VARC-2 definitions. We evaluated 375 patients who underwent SAVR with the 2 study devices. Intuity and ME were implanted in 252 (67.2%) and in 123 (32.8%) patients, respectively. There were no differences in terms of postoperative complications, including mortality (1% in each group; OR 0.46[0.05;4.21]). The incidence of pace-maker implantation was 6% and 5% in Intuity and ME groups, respectively (OR 0.53[0.27;1.07]). Intuity showed significantly lower gradients (Median mean gradients: 9mmHg vs 14mmHg, P<0.001), larger effective orifice area index (1.13cm2/m2 vs 1cm2/m2, P=0.007) and lower incidence of patient-prosthesis * AD and GC equally contributed to this article and therefore they should be both considered as first authors. Dr. Cibin’s doctoral scholarship is funded by Edwards Lifesciences. All authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Funding: None Curr Probl Cardiol 2023;48:101426 0146-2806/$ seefront matter https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2022.101426 Curr Probl Cardiol, January 2023 1mismatch (7.1% vs 22.8%, P=0.006). The RD Intuity provides similar early clinical outcomes but shows significantly better hemodynamic performance compared to the ME valve.