Polish Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
eISSN: 1897-4252
ISSN: 1731-5530
Kardiochirurgia i Torakochirurgia Polska/Polish Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Current issue Archive Manuscripts accepted About the journal Supplements Editorial board Reviewers Abstracting and indexing Contact Instructions for authors Publication charge Ethical standards and procedures
Editorial System
Submit your Manuscript
SCImago Journal & Country Rank
Search

1/2026
vol. 23
 
Share:
Send email
Share:
abstract:
Original paper

Medium-term results and the impact of structural valve deterioration of Trifecta versus Perceval bioprostheses: analysis from the Perfecta study

Paolo Nardi
1
,
Claudia Altieri
2
,
Alessandro Cristian Salvati
1
,
Dario Buioni
1
,
Federico Agneni
1
,
Mattia Scognamiglio
1
,
Carlo Bassano
1
,
Valentina Ajello
3
,
Giovanni Ruvolo
1
,
Augusto D’Onofrio
1

  1. Cardiac Surgery Division, Department of Surgical Sciences Tor Vergata University of Rome, Italy
  2. Cardiology Unit of the Cardiac Surgery Division, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Tor Vergata University Polyclinic, Rome, Italy
  3. Cardiac-Thoracic Anesthesia Division, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Tor Vergata University Polyclinic, Rome, Italy
Kardiochirurgia i Torakochirurgia Polska 2026; 23 (1): 39–47
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/kitp.2026.160638
Online publish date: 2026/04/04
View full text Get citation
 
PlumX metrics:
Introduction
Surgical aortic valve replacement remains the most effective treatment for severe aortic valve disease, thanks to the evolution and development of new-generation biological prostheses.

Aim
The study aimed to compare the follow-up results of aortic valve replacement with implantation of the Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis and St. Jude Trifecta sutured bioprosthesis (the single-center Perfecta study), evaluating the following end-points: survival, event-free survival rates, and impact of structural valve deterioration (SVD) on freedom from reintervention.

Material and methods
etween December 2014 and June 2023, 280 patients underwent aortic valve replacement with Trifecta (n = 220; mean age: 75.2 ±6.5 years) and Perceval implantation (n = 60; mean age: 77.9 ±5.1 years); 274 survivors (Trifecta = 214, Perceval = 60) were followed.

Results
At 7 years for both bioprostheses, Trifecta vs.Perceval, survival (68 ±4.1% vs. 89 ±4.8%; p = 0.19), freedom from cardiac death (90 ±2.3% vs. 94 ±1.7%; p = 0.38), from endocarditis (96 ±1.4% vs. 94 ±3.0%; p = 0.99) and from reintervention (98 ±1.4% vs. 100%; p = 0.13) were similar. SVD was observed in 60 Trifecta implants – 53 of which were in the initial stages – and in one in Perceval implant. Freedom from overall SVD was 74 ±4.2% vs. 93 ±6.4% (p = 0.09). Moderate patient-prosthesis mismatch was more frequently observed in the Trifecta than the Perceval group (n = 38 [17.3%] vs. n = 5 [8.2%]; p = 0.004). Independent predictors of SVD, both in the initial stages and overall, were Trifecta implantation (HRs 20.5;22.4) and moderate PPM (HRs 2.5;2.3). NYHA class (I–II 79.6% and 98.3% vs. 46.3% and 40%) significantly improved compared to preoperatively in both groups (p < 0.001).

Conclusions
Both bioprostheses appear to confer equally satisfactory late outcomes. Although the Trifecta prosthesis carries a higher risk of SVD, this risk does not seem to be significantly associated with worse clinical conditions or need for reoperation. The Perceval prosthesis can be considered a viable option in the context of the latest-generation bioprostheses.

keywords:

surgical aortic valve replacement, sutureless prostheses, third-generation sutured biological prostheses, structural valve deterioration
Termedia
About us Contact
Copyright notice Privacy policy Advertising policy Contact us
Quick links
Journals Books eBooks Events
© 2026 Termedia Sp. z o.o.
Developed by Termedia.