Prosthetic replacement of tricuspid valve: bioprosthetic or mechanical

BACKGROUND: Tricuspid valve replacement is one of the most challenging operations in cardiac surgery. Selection of the suitable prosthesis is still debatable. METHODS: In our institution, between January 1980 and December 2000, 129 tricuspid valve replacements were performed in 122 patients (14.7%). Bioprosthetic valves were used in 32 patients, whereas 97 patients had mechanical valve implantation. Twenty-two percent of replacements were done on men. Mean age was 35.27+/-11.56 years. In all patients, initially an annuloplasty technique was tried. Tricuspid valve replacement was performed when annuloplasty was not sufficient. In most of the cases, tricuspid valve interventions were done under cardiopulmonary bypass and on a beating heart. RESULTS: Early mortality was 24.5%. Patients were followed for 2 to 228 months. Seven patients underwent reoperation because of tricuspid valve dysfunction (7.6%). Nine patients died during the follow-up period. Late mortality was 9.7%. Actuarial estimates of survival in 20 years of follow-up for all tricuspid prosthetic valves, mechanical valves, and bioprosthetic valves were 65.1%+/-9.3%, 68.3%+/-10.6%, and 54.8%+/-12.1%, respectively. For the bioprosthetic valve group, freedom from structural valve degeneration was 90%+/-5.5%; for the mechanical valve group, freedom from deterioration, endocarditis, and leakage was 97.8%+/-4.2%, and freedom from thromboembolism was 92.6%+/-6.9%. CONCLUSIONS: We found that there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of early mortality, re-replacement, and midterm mortality (p > 0.05). Nevertheless, we recommend low profile modern bileaflet mechanical valves for prosthetic replacement of the tricuspid valve, due to their favorable hemodynamic characteristics and durability.     

Clinical assessment of prosthetic valve replacement of the right-sided cardiac valves: mechanical or bioprosthesis?

Clinical results with mechanical and bioprosthetic valve replacements for tricuspid and/or pulmonary positions were reviewed. Between February 1975 and December 1985, 34 bioprostheses (B) (22 Hancock, 9 Ionescu-Shiley and 3 Carpentier-Edwards pericardial) and 18 mechanical prostheses (M) (St. Jude Medical) were implanted in our institute excluding hospital death. Group with B included 29 tricuspid valve replacements and 5 pulmonary valve replacements. Group with M included 9 tricuspid valve replacements, 7 pulmonary valve replacements and 1 both valve replacements. The cumulative follow-up period was 207.2 patient-years (p-t) in group B and 55.0 p-y in group M. The incidence of valve failure was 0.48 +/- 0.48% per p-y in group B and 7.27 +/- 3.64% per p-y in group M (p less than 0.001). The incidence of valve-related events was 1.93 +/- 0.97% per p-y in group B and 9.09 +/- 4.07% per p-y in group M (p less than 0.001). At 3 years, the percent free of valve failure was 100 +/- 0% in group B and 76.8 +/- 10.2% in group M (p less than 0.05). Fourteen bioprosthetic valves (B') and 10 mechanical valves (M') were implanted at the right-sided cardiac valve position alone. The cumulative follow-up period was 94.2 p-y in group B' and 32.3 p-y in group M'. The incidence of valve-related events was 1.06 +/- 1.06% per p-y in group B' and 12.4 +/- 6.19% per p-y in group M' (p less than 0.001).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Long-term results with triple valve surgery

BACKGROUND: Whether to use biological or mechanical prostheses and whether to repair or replace the tricuspid valve during primary and reoperative triple valve surgery remains controversial. The objective of the present study was to review our experience with primary and reoperative triple valve surgery using CarboMedics (CM) and Carpentier-Edwards (C-E) heart valves. METHODS: All 73 patients undergoing triple valve surgery since 1982 were prospectively followed at the Montreal Heart Institute valve clinic. Aortic valve replacement was performed with CM prostheses (57 patients) and with C-E prostheses (16 patients). Mitral valve replacement was performed with mechanical prostheses (56 patients) and with biological valves (14 patients). Mitral valve repair was done in 3 patients. Tricuspid valve annuloplasty or commissurotomy or both were performed in 66 patients and the tricuspid valve was replaced in 7 patients. Patient survival, complications, and the type of valve procedures were analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty patients averaging 62+/-10 years of age underwent primary triple valve surgery and 43 patients averaging 60+/-10 years of age underwent reoperative triple valve surgery (p = 0.5). Tricuspid repair consisted of annuloplasty with the Bex linear reducer (n = 47), the C-E ring (n = 13), or the De Vega technique (n = 5). Tricuspid valve replacement was done using the C-E pericardial prostheses. The 30-day mortality was 17% and 12% in patients with primary and reoperative surgery, respectively (p = 0.5) and patient survival averaged 80%+/-7%, 75%+/-8%, and 41%+/-15%, and 70%+/-7%, 57%+/-9%, and 50%+/-10%, respectively 1, 5, and 10 years following surgery (p = 0.5). The freedom rate from thromboembolism and from bleeding complications were 87%+/-6% and 95%+/-3% in primary and reoperative patients, respectively, 5 years following surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Triple valve surgery, either as a primary or a reoperative procedure, results in acceptable long-term survival with both mechanical and biological prostheses.     

Cardiac valve replacement in patients on dialysis: influence of prosthesis on survival

BACKGROUND: Mechanical valves have been recommended for patients on dialysis because of purported accelerated bioprosthesis degeneration. This study was undertaken to determine time-related outcomes in dialysis patients requiring cardiac valve replacement. METHODS: From 1986 to 1998, 42 patients on chronic preoperative dialysis underwent valve replacement; 17 received mechanical valves and 25 received bioprostheses. Age was similar in both groups: 54+/-18.5 years (mechanical) and 59+/-15.5 years (bioprosthetic, p = 0.4). Sites of valve replacement were aortic (27), mitral (11), and aortic and mitral (4). Follow-up was 100% complete. RESULTS: Survival at 3 and 5 years was 50% and 33% after mechanical valve replacement, and 36% and 27% after bioprosthetic valve replacement (p = 0.3). Four patients with bioprostheses required reoperation: 3 for allograft endocarditis and 1 at 10 months for mitral bioprosthesis degeneration. One patient who received a mechanical valve required reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Prosthetic valve-related complications in patients on dialysis were similar for both mechanical and bioprosthetic valves. Because of the limited life expectancy of patients on dialysis, bioprosthesis degeneration will be uncommon. Therefore, surgeons should not hesitate to implant bioprosthetic valves in these patients.     

Long-term results of porcine bioprosthetic heterograft; a 13-years' experience

One hundred and ninety-four patients underwent valve replacements with the glutaraldehyde-preserved porcine bioprostheses (133 Hancock valves, 39 Angell-Shiley valves, 22 Carpentier-Edwards valves and 3 other valves) from 1974 through 1979. There were 105 women and 89 men, whose age ranged 18 to 62 (mean 38.8) years. One hundred and eighty-two patients had mitral bioprosthetic valve replacement (BVR)s, of which 52 had combined aortic mechanical valve replacements, 8 had aortic BVR's, 3 had tricuspid BVR's and 3 had multi-BVR's. Operative mortality was 10.8%. Only one patient was lost to follow-up. Cumulative duration of follow-up is 1421 patient-years. Linearized rate of anticoagulant related hemorrhage, thromboembolism (TE), prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE), primary tissue failure (PTF) and valve dysfunction (VD) were 0.07, 1.62, 0.49, 2.74 and 3.66% per patient-year. Actuarial freedom from TE, PVE, PTF and VD were 87.0 +/- 2.7%, 95.6 +/- 1.5%, 65.2 +/- 4.9% and 56.9 +/- 5.6% at 13 years. Actuarial survival rate was 67.4 +/- 4.0% at 13 years. Long term follow-up after valve replacement with porcine bioprosthetic valve confirms low thrombogenicity. But primary tissue failure was the chief cause of valve dysfunction and represent a major problem. At this time, we are going to use porcine bioprosthetic valve in the selected patients, that is in the situations in which anticoagulation is contraindicated.     

Treatment of endocarditis with valve replacement: the question of tissue versus mechanical prosthesis

BACKGROUND: It remains unknown whether there is any important clinical advantage to the use of either a bioprosthetic or mechanical valve for patients with native or prosthetic valve endocarditis. METHODS: Between 1964 and 1995, 306 patients underwent valve replacement for left-sided native (209 patients) or prosthetic (97 patients) valve endocarditis. Mechanical valves were implanted in 65 patients, bioprostheses in 221 patients, and homografts in 20 patients. RESULTS: Operative mortality was 18+/-2% and was independent of replacement valve type (p > 0.74). Long-term survival was superior for patients with native valve endocarditis (44+/-5% at 20 years) compared with those with prosthetic valve endocarditis (16+/-7% at 20 years) (p < 0.003). Survival was independent of valve type (p > 0.27). The long-term freedom from reoperation for patients who received a biologic valve who were younger than 60 years of age was low (51+/-5% at 10 years, 19+/-6% at 15 years). For patients older than 60 years, however, freedom from reoperation with a biological valve (84+/-7% at 15 years) was similar to that for all patients with mechanical valves (74+/-9% at 15 years) (p > 0.64). CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical valves are most suitable for younger patients with native valve endocarditis; however, tissue valves are acceptable for patients greater than 60 years of age with native or prosthetic valve infections and for selected younger patients with prosthetic valve infections because of their limited life expectancy.     

Aortic valve selection in the elderly patient

To determine the influence of valve selection on valve-related morbidity and mortality and patient survival, comparative long-term performance characteristics of mechanical (N = 68) and bioprosthetic (N = 73) heart valves were analyzed for 141 patients more than 70 years old who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement between 1970 and 1985. Cumulative patient follow-up was 491 patient-years (average, 4.3 years per patient). Hospital mortality was 18% and 19% for patients with mechanical valves and bioprosthetic valves, respectively. Survival at 5 years was 61 +/- 7% (+/- the standard error) and 67 +/- 10% for recipients of mechanical valves and bioprosthetic valves, respectively. Male sex (p = 0.014) and urgency of operation (p = 0.006) were independent risk factors for hospital mortality. Atrial fibrillation increased valve-related mortality (p = 0.01). No patient required reoperation or experienced structural valve failure. While anticoagulant-related hemorrhage was increased in recipients of mechanical valves (9.2 +/- 2.1%/patient-year) compared with recipients of bioprosthetic valves (2.3 +/- 1.1%/patient-year), it did not result in a death or lead to permanent disability. There was no difference in freedom from any valve-related complication at 5 years. However, when all morbid events are considered, recipients of bioprosthetic valves experienced fewer valve-related complications than patients receiving mechanical valves (10.7 +/- 2.3%/patient-year versus 17.6 +/- 2.5%/patient-year, respectively; p less than 0.05). The reduced incidence of anticoagulant-related hemorrhage and the infrequent need for warfarin sodium anticoagulation favor selection of a bioprosthetic heart valve in patients older than 70 years.     

Valve replacement in the right side of the heart in children: long-term follow-up

Twenty-five patients (16 male, 9 female) underwent right-sided valve replacement (10 pulmonary valve replacement, 14 tricuspid valve replacement, 3 tricuspid plus pulmonary valve replacement, and 2 replacements of a single atrioventricular valve) at the University of Nebraska Medical Center from June 1977 to December 1986. Twenty-one patients (84%) are long-term survivors with 2,035 months follow-up (range, 41 to 143 months; mean, 96.9 months). Twenty-three Carpentier-Edwards bioprosthetic valves, one Ionescu-Shiley bioprosthetic valve, and nine St. Jude Medical valves were inserted. Follow-up of 17 patients with a Carpentier-Edwards valve ranged from 5 years 9 months to 11 years 9 months (mean, 8 years 11 months). To date there has been one reoperation after 3 years 4 months in this group. One patient who received an Ionescu-Shiley bioprosthesis required re-replacement at 20 months after operation. Three of 4 patients who received St. Jude mechanical valves and are long-term survivors have required replacement after 36 to 56 months. We conclude that the Carpentier-Edwards bioprosthetic valve is a viable option in the right side of the heart in the young age group when annular size is adequate to accommodate an appropriate bioprosthesis.     

Tricuspid valve replacement in children

Between 1974 and January, 1986, 11 children underwent 13 tricuspid valve replacements at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto. Age at operation ranged from 24 hours to 14.5 years (mean, 6.9 years). Morphology of the tricuspid valves included Ebstein's anomaly (6 patients), congenital tricuspid regurgitation (3), tricuspid regurgitation and univentricular heart (1), and previous tricuspid valve excision for acute endocarditis (1). There were 4 early deaths: the 3 youngest infants in the series (age 1 day to 16 days) and another child who underwent emergency valve replacement died. On follow-up to 13 years after valve replacement, there were 2 late deaths and two reoperations. Both reoperations were for calcified degenerative tissue prostheses 6.5 and 9 years following implantation. The estimated 5-year survival based on a collected review of data from the literature is 68 +/- 9% for children with prosthetic tricuspid valves. Although tissue valve durability is better in the tricuspid position than on the systemic side of the circulation, calcification does result in late dysfunction. Tricuspid valve repair should always be carried out when possible, especially in the infant group. Elective prosthetic valve replacement in older children can be performed with reasonable operative risk and reasonable late results.     

Reoperations for left-sided low-profile mechanical prosthetic obstructions

A series of 2,474 hospital survivors of primary mitral, aortic, and double mitral-aortic valve replacement were observed for a cumulative period of 11.945 years (mean, 4.2 years; range, 0.6-14 years). The linearized incidences of reoperations for thrombotic obstructions were 0.33 +/- 0.08% for mitral valve replacement, 0.36 +/- 0.1% for aortic valve replacement, and 0.42 +/- 0.1% for double valve replacement (p = not significant). Forty-one patients (16 mitral, 12 aortic, and 13 double valve replacements) underwent a total of 44 reoperations with a mean interval of 36 +/- 29 months (range, 0.25-85 months) between operations. Diagnosis was established invasively only in 13 patients (30%). Hospital mortality at reoperation was 18% (8 patients); 28 patients (63%) required emergency surgery. The choice surgical procedures were thrombectomy for clotted aortic prostheses (18 of 24) and valve replacement for obstructed mitral valves (22 of 25; p less than .001). Rethrombosis occurred in 3 patients (1 aortic and 2 double valve replacements). At hospital admission 17 patients (38%) had prothrombin times outside therapeutic ranges (between 20 to 30% of the normal value). The incidence of reoperations for thrombosis in low-profile mechanical prostheses was unaffected by valvar position and number of prostheses implanted. Rethrombosis occurred only in previously cleaned valves, although its occurrence was not significant. The present results indicate that, as experience is gained in the diagnosis and surgical management of this complication, hospital mortality can be reduced significantly (from 37% to 4%).     

Long-term results of valve replacement in the right side of the heart in congenital heart disease--comparative study of bioprosthetic valve and mechanical valve

Valve replacements in the right side of the heart (TVR and PVR) were done on 16 patients with congenital heart disease, mainly tetralogy of Fallot and Ebstein anomaly. Including reoperations, 19 operations were performed on them and 20 artificial valves were inserted. Ten mechanical valves (7 St. Jude Medical valves, 3 Starr-Edwards valves) and 10 bioprosthetic valves (7 Carpentier-Edwards valves, 3 Ionescu-Shiley valves) were used. Age at valve replacement ranged from 9 to 52 years (mean 23.0 years), and the follow-up period was 1.28-19.8 years (mean 5.7 years). Including 2 sudden deaths, late death occurred in 4 patients, on all of whom mechanical valve replacements were done at the primary operation. Five-year survival rate of all patients was 76.4 +/- 12.1%, and 10-year survival rate was 63.6 +/- 15.4%. All the patients who received bioprosthesis at the primary operation survived at the time of this follow-up study. On the contrary, long-term results of mechanical valve was unsatisfactory with the 5-year survival of 62.5 +/- 17.1%. In spite of anti-coagulation therapy with warfarin, three patients with mechanical valve complicated thrombotic valves, which necessitated re-operations. Calcified bioprosthetic valve occurred in one patient with I-S valve 8.5 years after the implantation. Five-year complication-free rate was 87.5 +/- 11.7% for bioprosthesis, whereas it was 50.0 +/- 15.8% for mechanical valve (p less than 0.056). It is concluded that the bioprosthesis is the first choice for the valve replacement in the right side of the heart in congenital heart disease.     

Comparison of survival after mitral valve replacement with biologic and mechanical valves in 1139 patients

OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare 10-year survival in patients after mitral valve replacement with biologic or mechanical valve prostheses. METHODS: Retrospective survival analysis was performed on data from 1139 consecutive patients older than 18 years of age undergoing mitral valve replacement with Carpentier-Edwards (n = 495; Baxter Healthcare Corp, Irvine, Calif) or St Jude Medical (n = 644; St Jude Medical, Inc, St Paul, Minn) prostheses. RESULTS: The 10-year survival was not statistically different between the patients receiving Carpentier-Edwards valves and those receiving St Jude Medical valves (P =.16). Adjusted survival estimates at 2, 5, and 10 years were 82% +/- 2% (95% confidence intervals, 79%-85%), 69% +/- 2% (95% confidence intervals, 64%-73%), and 42% +/- 3% (95% confidence intervals, 37%-48%), respectively, for the Carpentier-Edwards group and 83% +/- 2% (95% confidence intervals, 80%-86%), 72% +/- 2% (95% confidence intervals, 69%-76%), and 51% +/- 3% (95% confidence intervals, 45%-58%), respectively, for the St Jude Medical group. Predictors of worse survival after mitral valve replacement are older age, lower ejection fraction, presence of class IV congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, renal disease, smoking history, hypertension, concurrent other valve surgery, and redo heart surgery. CONCLUSION: Choice of biologic or mechanical prosthesis does not significantly affect long-term patient survival after mitral valve replacement.     

More than ten years' follow-up of the Hancock porcine bioprosthesis in Japan.

From February 1975 through October 1981, 256 Hancock porcine bioprostheses (Johnson & Johnson Cardiovascular, King of Prussia, Pa.) (60 aortic, 169 mitral, and 27 pulmonary/tricuspid position) were implanted in 220 patients (104 male and 116 female, aged 9 to 67 years; mean 43.3) at Kyushu University Hospital in Japan. The procedures include 41 aortic valve replacements, 121 mitral valve replacements, 4 pulmonary valve replacements, 6 tricuspid valve replacements, and 48 combined valve replacements (31 aortic plus mitral, 13 mitral plus tricuspid, and 4 aortic plus mitral plus tricuspid). Hospital mortality was 6.4%. Follow-up was 98% during 8 to 14 (mean 10.5) years. Cumulative follow-up was 1836 patient-years and 2078 valve-years. At 10 years the overall actuarial survival rate, including hospital morality, was 70% +/- 3%, and freedom from valve-related mortality with sudden death was 87% +/- 3%. More than half of the current survivors required no anticoagulant therapy. Freedom from thromboembolism or anticoagulant-related hemorrhage (or both) and prosthetic valve endocarditis was common. Freedom from structural valve failure and reoperation declined more than 9 years after replacement of left-sided heart valves but not after replacement of right-sided heart valves. Sixty-seven patients underwent 68 repeat operations, and there were four deaths (5.9%). The rate of freedom from overall valve-related complications at 10 years was 62% +/- 8% for aortic valve replacement, 53% +/- 5% for mitral valve replacement, 80% +/- 13% for pulmonary/tricuspid valve replacement, and 42% +/- 9% for combined valve replacement. There was a significant difference between pulmonary/tricuspid valve replacement and combined valve replacement (p less than 0.05). The Hancock bioprosthesis is suitable for the replacement of valves in the right side of the heart but not for combined valve replacement.     

Comparative analysis of mechanical and bioprosthetic valves after aortic valve replacement

Comparative long-term performance characteristics of Bj?rk-Shiley mechanical and bioprosthetic valves were analyzed for patients undergoing aortic valve replacement between 1976 and 1981. A total of 419 patients received either a standard Bj?rk-Shiley (n = 266) or bioprosthetic (porcine, n = 126, or pericardial, n = 27) aortic valve. Cumulative patient follow-up was 1,705 patient-years; the average patient follow-up was 4.1 +/- 2.7 years. Survival data were obtained for all but 11 patients (97% complete follow-up) up to 9 years after operation. Survival at 5 years was 81% +/- 4% (+/- standard error) for Bj?rk-Shiley and for bioprosthetic valve recipients. Valve failure in the Bj?rk-Shiley group was predominantly due to valve-related mortality and did not result from structural failure. Patients with bioprosthetic valves experienced valve failure as a result of prosthetic valve endocarditis and intrinsic valve degeneration. Although patients with bioprostheses experienced a lower incidence of valve-related morbidity than Bj?rk-Shiley valve recipients (p less than 0.03), no difference could be demonstrated in the incidence of valve-related mortality or valve failure at 5 years between bioprosthetic and Bj?rk-Shiley valves. Mortality rate from valve failure was higher for Bj?rk-Shiley (86%, 12/14) than bioprosthetic valves (36%, 5/14) (p less than 0.01).     

Mechanical Valve Replacement Versus Bioprosthetic Valve Replacement in the Tricuspid Valve Position

Background

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and risk of tricuspid valve replacements and to compare bioprosthetic versus mechanical valves.

Methods

Between 1991 and 2009, 104 consecutive patients (71 women; mean age, 57 ± 10.8 years) with tricuspid valvular disease underwent mechanical TVR (mechanical group; n = 59) or bioprosthetic TVR (bioprosthesis group; n = 45). Follow‐up was complete in 97.1% (n = 101) with a median duration of 49.9 months (range 0–230 months).

Results

Hospital mortality after mechanical TVR and bioprosthetic TVR was not different on adjusted analysis by propensity score. Ten‐year actuarial survival after mechanical and bioprosthetic TVR was 83.9 ± 7.6% and 61.4 ± 9.1%, respectively (p = 0.004). However, there was also no significant difference in terms of adjusted analysis by propensity score (p = 0.084). No statistically significant difference was detected between mechanical and bioprosthetic valves in regard to event‐free survival.

Conclusions

Mechanical TVR is not inferior to bioprosthetic TVR in terms of occurrence of valve‐related events, especially anticoagulation‐related complications. doi: 10.1111/jocs.12093 (J Card Surg 2013;28:212–217)     

Incidence and risk factors of prosthetic valve endocarditis

To study the incidence and risk factors of prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) we followed 99.5% of 912 patients who had valve replacements from 1 January 1981 to 31 December 1985 for 1-6 (mean 3) years. PVE occurred in 27 patients (2.96% or 0.98% per patient-year). The incidence of PVE in the aortic position (3.9%) was significantly higher than in the mitral position (1.5%): chi-square = 6.1, P less than 0.025. PVE developed in 19 of 329 patients with bioprostheses (5.8%), and in 8 of 583 patients with mechanical valves (1.4%): chi-square = 14.48, P less than 0.005). Actuarially at 5-year follow-up, 90.7% +/- 2.16% of the bioprosthetic group and 98.4% +/- 0.56% of the mechanical valve group was free of PVE (P less than 0.001). Antecedent endocarditis increased both the incidence and relative risk of PVE 7-fold compared to patients without antecedent endocarditis (chi-square = 32.0, P less than 0.0001). Bioprosthetic valve replacement in infective endocarditis increased the risk of PVE 12-fold compared to valve replacement by mechanical prostheses. In conclusion: in the order of importance, antecedent endocarditis, bioprostheses and aortic position are risk factors in the development of PVE. Bioprostheses implanted in patients with antecedent endocarditis further enhance the risk of PVE.     

Bioprosthetic Versus Mechanical Valve Replacement in Patients with Infective Endocarditis

During the 5-year period, 1979-1984, at the Texas Heart Institute, 4,598 patients underwent cardiac valve replacement procedures of which 185 were for acute infective endocarditis. Staphylococcus and streptococcus accounted for 80% of the cases and congestive heart failure was a leading indication in 63%. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the recurrence of endocarditis dependent upon whether the patient had an Ionescu-Shiley bioprosthetic pericardial valve or a mechanical valve (St. Jude Medical). Actuarial freedom from both early and late reoperation was higher for prosthetic valves than bioprosthetic valve patients. We conclude that mechanical valves are the valves of choice in acute infective endocarditis which apparently is the results of less biologic tissue available for exposure to infection by the offending organisms.     

Early and late risk of mitral valve replacement. A 12 year concomitant comparison of the porcine bioprosthetic and prosthetic disc mitral valves

A consecutive series of 706 mitral valve replacements was performed from January, 1972, to January, 1984. The follow-up ranged from 6 to 150 months with a mean of 50 and a median of 43 months. Seven percent (50) of the patient were lost to follow-up. There were 243 men and 463 women, whose ages ranged from 17 to 86 years (mean 58). A porcine bioprosthetic valve was implanted in 528 patients (514 Hancock and 14 Carpentier-Edwards valves) and a prosthetic disc valve in 178 patients (102 standard disc Bj?rk-Shiley, 34 Beall, and 42 Harken disc valves). Seven patients were in Functional Class II, 325 in Class III, and 374 in Class IV. A concomitant operative procedure was performed in 253 of the 706 patients (36%). Mitral regurgitation was the primary hemodynamic lesion in 363 and mitral stenosis in 343. Operative mortality figures were as follows: 77 of 706 (11%) for the overall group, 34 of 453 (7.5%) for isolated mitral valve replacement, 30 of 169 (17.5%, p = 0.001) for mitral replacement plus coronary bypass, 49 of 528 (9%) for the bioprosthetic valve group, and 28 of 178 (16%) for the prosthetic disc valve group (p = 0.01). After the operation, 262 patients were in Functional Class I, 99 in Class II, and 18 in Class III. The long-term survival rate was significantly lower in patients who had an associated procedure (45% +/- 6%), who had mitral regurgitation rather than mitral stenosis (53% +/- 5% versus 67% +/- 4%) (p = 0.002), who were in Functional Class IV rather than Classes I to III (51% +/- 4% versus 70% +/- 4%) (p = 0.001), and who received a prosthetic disc valve rather than a bioprosthesis (40% +/- 6% versus 67% +/- 4%) (p = 0.001). Thromboembolic rates were significantly higher with prosthetic valves than with bioprosthetic valves (4.6% +/- 0.22% versus 2.4% +/- 0.5% per patient-year of follow-up), and the incidence of anticoagulant-related hemorrhage was significantly higher in the prosthetic valve group (1.65% versus 0.43% per patient-year). Primary valve dysfunction was significantly more common in the bioprostheses (1.23% versus 0.40% per patient-year).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)     

Valve replacement in patients on chronic renal dialysis: implications for valve prosthesis selection

BACKGROUND: Reports are sparse describing heart valve replacement in patients with end-stage renal disease. This review assesses a 15-year experience and outcomes after valve replacement in patients on chronic preoperative renal dialysis. METHODS: A computerized database, hospital records, and telephone contact provided outcome data for patients on chronic dialysis undergoing valve replacement between March 22, 1985, and October 13, 2000, in two hospitals. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients underwent 95 valve procedures (74 operations). Ages ranged from 23 years to 84 years (mean, 57 years). Fifty-five aortic, 30 mitral, and 3 tricuspid valve replacements and 7 valvuloplasties were performed. Six of the 74 procedures were reoperative valve replacements. In the 46 patients with reliable long-term (greater than 30 days) follow-up data, significant bleeding or stroke was documented in 17 of 34 patients with a mechanical valve and 1 of 12 patients with a bioprosthetic valve. Overall survival (including two operative deaths) was 72.8% at 3 months, 65.4% at 6 months, 60.5% at 1 year, 39.8% at 2 years, 28.5% at 3 years, and 15.9% at 6 years (Kaplan-Meier). Type of valve implanted did not influence early and late survival. CONCLUSIONS: In this series of patients on chronic dialysis, survival appears to justify valve replacement. However, the sixfold higher incidence of late bleeding or stroke in patients on dialysis with a mechanical valve requiring warfarin suggests that bioprosthetic valves are the valve substitute of choice in patients on chronic dialysis.     

Carpentier-Edwards pericardial aortic valve in middle-aged patients comparison with the St. Jude medical valve

Objective The objective of the present study was to compare long-term results of single aortic valve replacement (AVR) with mechanical (St. Jude Medical valves: standard) and biologic (the Carpentier-Edwards pericardial) prostheses. Method: Between 1995 and 2002, 95 patients who underwent single AVR with mechanical (n=46) or biologic (n=49) prostheses were enrolled in this study. The mean age at the operation was 54.0±9.6 years (range: 20 to 69 years) with the mechanical and 68.8±7.1 years (range: 44 to 85 years) with the biologic prosthesis. Results: The 9-year actuarial survival rate, which was calculated by taking perioperative mortality into account, was 90.3±4.6% for patients with mechanical valves and 87.6 ±4.8% for patients with bioprostheses, with no difference between the two groups (p=0.342). The 9-year freedom rate from thromboembolism, reoperation, endocarditis was 94.8+3.6%, 100% and 97.8 ±2.2% for patients with mechanical valves and 98.0 ±2.0%, 97.5 ±3.4% and 95.0 ±3.4% for those with bioprostheses, respectively. After 9 years, freedom from cardiac death averaged 97.8% in the group with mechanical valves compared with 95.3% in those with bioprostheses (p=0.541). Conclusion: We conclude that the mid-term durability of the Carpentier-Edwards pericardial valve in the aortic position for the elderly is excellent. Nevertheless, the risk of tissue valve reoperation progressively increases with time, and a longer follow-up may be necessary to provide its value compared with the mechanical valves in a country like Japan with a high life expectancy. (Jpn J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005; 53:465-469)