The freestyle aortic bioprosthesis: A systematic review

Andrew G. Sherrah, J. James B Edelman, Shane R. Thomas, Peter W. Brady, Michael K. Wilson, Richmond W. Jeremy, Paul G. Bannon, Michael P. Vallely*

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

    7 Citations (Scopus)


    Background: The Medtronic Freestyle bioprosthesis (FSB) provides an alternative to other prostheses for both aortic valve and aortic root surgery. This paper is a systematic review of the post-operative outcomes in patients with aortic valve and/or aortic root disease following FSB implantation. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for primary analysis, prospective randomised studies comparing the FSB with an alternative aortic prosthesis were included. Additionally, case series that included data for at least 100 individual operated patients were used for secondary analysis. Results: Among three identified randomised studies, 199 FSB cases were compared with homografts, and stented and an alternative stentless bioprosthesis. The FSB showed comparable hospital mortality (4.5% vs 5.3%) and eight-year actuarial survival (80 ± 5.0% versus 77 ± 6.0%) with the homograft (respectively) and comparable reduction in left ventricular mass index relative to other prosthesis types. Over 6000 individual patients were included in the selected 15 case series. Weighted mean operative mortality, neurological event rate and five-year actuarial survival was 5.2%, 5.5% and 77.8%, respectively. Conclusion: The FSB performed comparably against alternative prostheses regarding in-hospital mortality, long-term survival and reduction in left ventricular mass index. Included case series demonstrated robust post-operative outcomes in both the short and long term.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)1110-1117
    Number of pages8
    JournalHeart, Lung and Circulation
    Issue number12
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2014

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The freestyle aortic bioprosthesis: A systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this