Abstract
Background/Objectives: Surgical aortic valve replacement effectively relieves left ventricular afterload and promotes reverse remodeling in patients with severe aortic stenosis. The Perceval prosthesis offers a hybrid approach, combining complete annular decalcification with sutureless deployment. This design allows for reduced operative times and potentially larger effective orifice areas. However, comparative data with conventional stented bioprosthetic valves remain limited, particularly regarding reverse remodeling, hemodynamic performance, and long-term clinical outcomes. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, 115 patients underwent aortic valve replacement with either the Perceval valve (n = 44) or conventional stented bovine pericardial valves (n = 71). Results: The Perceval group showed a 100% procedural success rate with no in-hospital mortality, significantly shorter cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times, larger effective orifice areas, and a lower incidence of patient-prosthesis mismatch. Both groups demonstrated favorable left ventricular mass regression and reverse remodeling. The rates of paravalvular leakage, permanent pacemaker implantation, and redo aortic valve replacement were comparable between groups. Multivariate Cox regression identified the follow-up indexed left ventricular mass as an independent predictor of major adverse cardiac and cerebral events. Conclusions: In this study, the Perceval valve was associated with promising hemodynamic characteristics and procedural efficiencies, particularly in cases with small aortic annuli and during minimally invasive procedures. The valve was associated with reverse ventricular remodeling and clinical outcomes that appeared similar to those of conventional stented bioprostheses. These observations suggest it may represent a potential alternative option for surgical aortic valve replacement in appropriate clinical scenarios. However, randomized control trials are needed to confirm these associations.