Comparative Long-Term Clinical Performance of Mechanical Aortic Valve Prostheses

Abstract

ImportanceAggregated data and long-term follow-up in national health data registers offer the opportunity to compare the performance of mechanical aortic prostheses within the same population.ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical performance of mechanical aortic valve prostheses.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis nationwide cohort study included all 5224 patients who underwent primary mechanical aortic valve replacement in Sweden between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2018. Statistical analysis was performed between May and September 2023.ExposuresSurgical aortic valve replacement with the On-X, Carbomedics, Bicarbon, Standard, Regent, Open Pivot, Masters, or Advantage valve models.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and secondary outcomes were reintervention, heart failure, major bleeding, stroke, and embolic events. Regression standardization was used to account for baseline differences.ResultsOverall, 5224 patients (mean [SD] age, 56.8 [11.7] years; 3908 men [74.8%]) were included. Total follow-up time was 43 982 person-years (mean [SD], 8.4 [4.6] years; maximum, 17.2 years). After regression standardization, there was a significant difference in 10-year mortality between the Carbomedics model group (17%; 95% CI, 15%-18%), Regent model group (17%; 95% CI, 13%-20%), and Standard model group (17%; 95% CI, 14%-19%) compared with the Bicarbon model group (27%; 95% CI, 21%-34%).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study of mechanical valve surgical aortic replacement outcomes in Sweden, the rate of all-cause mortality was higher in the Bicarbon group than in the Carbomedics, Regent, and Standard model groups. These findings warrant further research on the long-term clinical performance of the Bicarbon valve.