OBJECTIVES The Edwards Intuity valve is a rapid deployment aortic prosthesis that favours less invasive approaches. However, evidence about the clinical behaviour of their smaller sizes is scarce. Herein, we studied haemodynamic behaviours and clinical outcomes of small Intuity prostheses (19–21 mm) in comparison to larger Intuity prostheses (>21 mm). METHODS This is an observational study including patients implanted with an Edwards Intuity rapid deployment aortic prosthesis. Patients with prosthesis sizes 19–21 and >21 mm were included. Baseline and perioperative variables, as well as adverse events during the follow-up were recorded and compared between groups. RESULTS A total of 122 patients (37% female, mean age 75 ± 4.5 years) were included, of whom 54 (45%) were implanted with a small prosthesis and 68 (55%) with a prosthesis >21 mm. There were no significant differences between patients with small Intuity prostheses and patients with larger prostheses regarding in-hospital mortality (2% vs 4%, P = 0.43) or mortality during the follow-up (3.41 vs 2.45 per 100 patients-years; P = 0.58). Survival in the small Intuity valve group was 95% at 1 year and 83% at 6 years, whereas in the larger Intuity valve group was 96% at 1 year and 78% at 6 years. The presence of a small prosthesis did not influence mid-term survival (log-rank P-value = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS This study showed good clinical performance of Intuity aortic prostheses with appropriate mid-term survival in patients with the small aortic annulus. Thus, the Edwards Intuity rapid deployment aortic prosthesis may be considered as a potential option in patients with the small aortic annulus.

<b><i>Background:</i></b> The use of rapid deployment and sutureless aortic prostheses is increasing. Previous reports have shown promising results on haemodynamic performance and mortality rates. However, the impact of these bioprostheses on left ventricular mass (LVM) regression remains unknown. We decided to study the changes in remodelling and LVM regression in isolated severe aortic stenosis treated with conventional or Perceval® or Intuity® valves. <b><i>Method and Results:</i></b> From January 2011 to January 2016, 324 bioprostheses were implanted in our centre. The collected characteristics were divided into 3 groups: conventional valves, Perceval®, and Intuity®, and they were analysed after 12 months. There were 183 conventional valves (56%), 72 Perceval® (22%), and 69 Intuity® (21.2%). The statistical analysis showed significant differences in transprosthetic postoperative peak gradient (23 [18–29] mm Hg vs. 21 [16–29] mm Hg and 18 [14–24] mm Hg, <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001), ventricular mass electrical criteria regression (Sokolow and Cornell products), and 1-year survival (90 vs. 93% and 97%, log rank <i>p</i> value = 0.04) in conventional, Perceval®, and Intuity® groups. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> We observed differences in haemodynamic, electrocardiographic, and echocardiographic parameters related to the different types of prosthesis. Patients with the Intuity® prosthesis had the highest reduction in peak aortic gradient and the higher ventricular mass regression. Besides, patients with the Intuity® prosthesis had less risk of mortality during follow-up than the other two groups. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

We report a case of acute aortic syndrome in a 64-year-old man who presented with chest pain and hypotension. His electrocardiogram and cardiac troponins were normal. Computed tomography showed hemopericardium of 2.4 cm, but no aortic intimal tear. At surgery, the portion of the aorta affected by adventitial hemorrhage was replaced with a Dacron graft. A nonpenetrating ulcerated plaque was also observed. Massive bleeding through the chest drains with hypotension required emergency reoperation in the intensive care unit. The patient was discharged home on postoperative day 11.