Contents
Download PDF
pdf Download XML
197318 Views
11908 Downloads
Share this article
Review Article | Volume 26 Issue 1 (, 2021) | Pages 1 - 8
Sutureless Valves Reduce Hospital Costs Compared to Traditional Valves
 ,
 ,
 ,
1
Département de Pathologie Cardiaque, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France. Electronic correspohdence: francois.laborde@imm.fr.
2
CHU brabois, Institut Lorrain du Coeur et des Vaisseaux Louis Mathieu, Vandoeuvre les Nancy, Université de Lorraine, France.
3
Service de Chirurgie Cardio-Vasculaire, Hôpital privé de Parly II, Le Chesnay, France.
4
Département de Pathologie Cardiaque, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.
Under a Creative Commons license
PMID : -28544824
Published
Jan. 9, 2017
Abstract

Background: The study aim was to assess differences in clinical outcome, safety, and associated costs between sutureless and aortic isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) with a standard bioprosthesis.

Methods: A retrospective comparative study was conducted to investigate 65 patients, each of whom had undergone isolated AVR with a traditional aortic valve (T) or a Perceval S sutureless aortic prosthesis (P) between January 2010 and December 2012. Cost data were drawn from the proprietary cost accounting system of the hospital, excluding acquisition costs of the devices. A linear regression model was used to estimate the mean total costs difference between groups.

Results: The mean cardiopulmonary bypass time and aortic cross-clamp times in the T and P groups were 80 ± 41 min and 58 ± 26 min versus 38 ± 16 min and 26 ± 10 min, respectively (p <0.0001). The mean intensive care unit and ward stays in both groups were 4.2 ± 5.9 and 11.9 ± 6.5 days versus 3.8 ± 4.7 and 10 ± 4.5 days, respectively (p = 0.68 and p = 0.05). The mean costs savings for group P compared to group T were €3,801 (p = 0.13), mainly driven by hospital stay costs. Savings between the P and T groups increased with age: €4,992 in patients aged 70-79 years and €9,326 in those aged 80+ years, and with risk (€4,296 for high-risk patients).

Conclusions: Sutureless aortic valves present shorter procedural times and lower hospital costs compared to traditional valves, with higher cost savings at increased patient age and risk. Sutureless aortic valves seem to be cost-effective in patients undergoing AVR.

 

 

 

How to cite: Laborde, F., Folliguet, T., Ghorayeb, G., & Zannis, K. (2017). Sutureless Valves Reduce Hospital Costs Compared to Traditional Valves. The Journal of heart valve disease26(1), 1–8.

 
Keywords
Recommended Articles
Research Article
Cross Sectional Study on Nutritional Status and Prevalence of Anemia in Rural Adolescents
Published: 26/06/2013
Download PDF
Read Article
Research Article
To Study the Serum Homocysteine Profile Pattern in AMI & Ischaemic Stroke in Young Adults.
...
Published: 30/08/2025
Download PDF
Read Article
Research Article
Incidence, Clinical Profile, Complications and Outcome of Rodenticide Poisoning in Tertiary Care Hospital
...
Published: 26/08/2025
Download PDF
Read Article
Research Article
To Find Out of the Effects of Mother Nutrition Status on Birth Weight, Anthropometric Measurements of Full-Term Newborn
Published: 07/11/2022
Download PDF
Read Article
© Copyright Journal of Heart Valve Disease