Late results after mitral valve replacement with Mosaic bioprosthesis in patients aged 65 years or younger

Open in a separate window OBJECTIVESAlthough in younger patients indications for biological prosthesis implantation in mitral valve replacement remain controversial, recently bioprostheses use increased considerably. We present late results obtained with the Medtronic Mosaic bioprosthesis in patients aged 65 years or younger. METHODSBetween 2007 and 2017, 67 mitral Mosaic bioprostheses were implanted in patients aged 65 years or younger (58.5 ± 6.4 years). Follow-up extended up to 13 years. Survival, freedom from structural valve degeneration, endocarditis, thromboembolic events and reoperation were considered as main clinical end points evaluated at 1, 5 and 10 years.RESULTSThe mean follow-up was 4.7 ± 2.8 years. Overall mortality rate was 12%. At 1, 5 and 10 years, survival was 94 ± 3%, 89 ± 4% and 77 ± 9%, respectively. Freedom from structural valve degeneration was 100%, 94 ± 4% and 71 ± 21%. Freedom from endocarditis was 95 ± 3%, 90 ± 6% and 84 ± 8%. Freedom from thromboembolic events was 94 ± 3%, 90 ± 5% and 90 ± 5%. Freedom from reoperation was 94 ± 3%, 87 ± 5% and 65 ± 19%.CONCLUSIONSMosaic bioprosthesis appears a valid mitral valve substitute even when employed in ≤65-year-old patients.     

Late results after Starr-Edwards valve replacement in children

Selection of types of prosthetic heart valves for children remains controversial. The case histories of 50 children surviving valve replacement with Starr-Edwards prostheses between 1963 and 1978 were reviewed to evaluate the long-term performance of mechanical valves. The 31 boys and 19 girls ranged from 6 months to 18 years in age (mean 10.4 years); 19 patients had had aortic valve replacement, 24 patients had had mitral valve replacement, and one patient had had both. Among the six patients who had had tricuspid valve replacement, four had corrected transposition, so that the tricuspid valve was the systemic atrioventricular valve. Mean (+/- standard deviation) follow-up interval was 7.9 +/- 4.9 years (maximum 17 years). For all patients, the 5 year survival rate was 86% +/- 6%. At 10 years postoperatively, the survival rate (+/- standard error) was 90% +/- 7% after aortic valve replacement and 76% +/- 8% after systemic atrioventricular valve replacement. At follow-up, 39 patients were alive, and 38 were in New York Heart Association Class I or II. Of the 11 deaths, four were valve-related. Seven patients had major (requiring hospitalization) thromboembolic events, and five patients had minor transient neurological symptoms suggesting thromboembolism; 50% of these patients were not taking warfarin (Coumadin) at the time of the thromboembolic event. The incidence of late (greater than 30 days) thromboembolism was 5.3 per 100 patient-years after aortic and 2.0 per 100 patient-years after systemic atrioventricular valve replacement. At 10 years postoperatively, 66% +/- 15% of patients who had had aortic valve replacement and 91% +/- 6% of those who had had systemic atrioventricular valve replacement were free of thromboembolism. The excellent long-term survival, absence of mechanical failure, and relatively low rate of thromboembolism with this prosthesis contrast with our experience with biological valves, in which 41% of children required reoperation in 5 years. Currently, mechanical valves, such as the Starr-Edwards prostheses, are our preferred valves for pediatric patients.     

Long-term survivors after valve replacement with a Starr-Edwards mitral disk valve prosthesis

We report four long-term survivors after valve replacement with a Starr-Edwards (S-E) mitral caged-disk valve. A model 6520 disk valve, size 3M, had been used in all of the four patients. Of the four patients, three underwent replacement of the disk valves 23, 24, and 26 years after mitral valve replacement (MVR), respectively. A pacemaker was implanted in the remaining patient 33 years after MVR. The S-E disk valves were considered hemodynamically slightly stenotic compared with modern bileaflet valves. No disk wear was detected in any of the three explanted valves, and in the remaining patient, a noninvasive evaluation of the disk showed that it was functioning normally. These results suggest the favorable long-term durability of the S-E disk valve.     

Late results after mitral valve replacement with bileaflet mechanical prosthesis in children: evaluation of prosthesis-patient mismatch

BACKGROUND: Mechanical prosthesis is the choice of valve at the mitral position in children, although re-replacement of prostheses because of prosthesis-patient mismatch is almost inevitable when prostheses were implanted in small children. The methods to predict prosthesis-patient mismatch as a result of patients' somatic growth or pannus formation in children by noninvasive methods have not been well established. METHODS: Thirty-two children underwent mitral valve replacement with 37 bileaflet mechanical prostheses (26 St. Jude Medical prosthetic valves, and 11 CarboMedics prosthetic valves) and were followed up a mean of 6.8 years (maximum 18.3 years) with a complete follow-up rate of 94%. RESULTS: There were no operative deaths and 5 late deaths. Re-replacement of mitral valve because of prosthesis-patient mismatch was required in 5 patients. Freedom from valve-related events and re-replacement of mitral valve at 15 years were 32% +/- 23% and 54% +/- 18%, respectively. Actuarial survival rate was 63% +/- 19% at 15 years. Prosthetic valve orifice area index (manufactured geometric prosthetic valve area divided by patient's body surface area) was well correlated with maximum transprosthesis flow velocity estimated by Doppler echocardiography during follow-up, whereas valve orifice area index had no significant correlation with pulmonary artery wedge pressure assessed by cardiac catheterization. Maximum transprosthesis flow velocity had a significant correlation with pulmonary artery wedge pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Valve orifice area index itself was not a reliable index to predict prosthesis-patient mismatch. Maximum transprosthesis flow velocity was a useful index to predict pulmonary artery wedge. Invasive cardiac catheterization to determine re-replacement of the prosthesis should be considered when maximum transprosthesis flow velocity exceeds 270 cm/s.     

Homograft replacement of the mitral valve: eight-year results

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess whether the mitral homograft represents a valuable alternative for complete or partial mitral valve replacement. METHODS: Since 1993, 104 patients underwent mitral homograft replacement surgery. The mean age was 38 +/- 15 years. The causes of mitral valve disease were rheumatic disease (n = 76), infective endocarditis (n = 24), and others (n = 4). Sixty-five of these procedures were total homografts, and 39 were partial homografts. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 52 +/- 35 months (maximum, 117 months). Overall hospital mortality was 4 (3.8%) of 104 patients and 2.5% versus 8.7% for patients without endocarditis and with endocarditis, respectively (P <.19). There were 9 late deaths (cardiac, 4; noncardiac, 5). There have been 5 early (<3 months) and 10 late reoperations. Of the remaining 77 patients, New York Heart Association class was I in 61, II in 14, and III in 2. Four patients had endocarditis, and 5 had an ischemic or hemorrhagic event. Freedom from major cardiac events was 71% +/- 6% at 8 years (partial at 81% vs total at 63%, P <.19). Among patients with a total homograft, freedom from major cardiac events was 61% +/- 9% and 85% +/- 8% at 6 years in patients younger than and older than 40 years, respectively (P =.09). CONCLUSION: The risk of early dysfunction related to a mismatch between the mitral homograft and the patient's valve is the main pitfall of the technique. Beyond that stage, the results were comparable with those of bioprostheses in a cohort of young patients.     

Long-term clinical results after combined aortic and mitral valve replacement

The results after 282 consecutive double (aortic & mitral) valve replacements (DVR) are compared with our previously reported experience after mitral (MVR, n = 810) and aortic valve replacement (AVR, n = 1753). All but one patient received Bj?rk-Shiley valves. The follow-up which closed on August 1, 1985 was 99.3% and covered 16,869 patient-years (mean 6.3 years/patient). Autopsies were performed in 74% of all fatalities. Early mortality rates were identical in the three patient groups, and late mortality did not differ between MVR and DVR patients. The fraction of valve-related mortality was similar in all groups. Anticoagulant-related bleeding was equally common in all patient groups. The incidences of thromboembolism, reoperation and valve failure did not differ between MVR and DVR patients, but were significantly higher than among AVR patients. With the exception of a slightly increased incidence of prosthetic valve endocarditis, the results after DVR equal those after MVR. In cases with severe mitral valve disease but borderline aortic valve disease, primary DVR is clearly justified and eliminates the need for, and risks of, a secondary AVR.     

Patient status five or more years after mitral valve replacement

Among 136 consecutive patients undergoing isolated mitral valve replacement prior to February, 1966, 30 died postoperatively and 33 died during the follow-up period that extended to nine years. The late deaths were due to cardiac causes in 13 patients, thromboembolism in 9, and miscellaneous causes in 8 and were sudden (cause undetermined) in 3. Of patients surviving five or more years after mitral valve replacement, 55% remained improved (40.4% of the entire group).