Bovine pericardium versus porcine aortic valve: comparison of tissue biological properties as prosthetic valves

The choice of a bioprosthetic valve substitute remains controversial with the major concern being primary tissue failure after implantation. We compared biological properties of the two most frequently used bioprosthetic valve materials, bovine pericardium and porcine aortic valve, before and 90 days after subcutaneous implantation in rats. Before implantation, tissue collagen and water content were measured in nine pieces of bovine pericardium and porcine valves, each fixed in 0.625% glutaraldehyde; calcium, tissue collagen, and water content were measured in another nine pieces of the same tissues after 90 days' implantation. Bovine pericardium had higher collagen content than that of porcine valve (hydroxyproline, 7.98 +/- 0.05* vs. 4.56 +/- 0.02 micrograms/mg, dry weight) but lesser water content (72.16 +/- 3.22%* vs. 87.36 +/- 1.62%) before implantation (*p < 0.001, mean +/- SD, t test); after implantation, bovine pericardium still maintained higher collagen content (hydroxyproline, 4.89 +/- 0.04* vs. 2.61 +/- 0.06 micrograms/mg, dry weight) but contained the same amount of water (60.24 +/- 5.08% vs. 61.43 +/- 9.00%) and calcium (214.43 +/- 34.34 vs. 199.33 +/- 53.44 micrograms/mg, dry weight) (*p < 0.001, mean +/- SD, t test). We conclude that bovine pericardium has superior intrinsic biological properties for prosthetic valve manufacture. With proper integration of properties and design it will in some applications be superior to the porcine aortic valve.