Long-term outcomes of isolated mechanical versus bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement in different age groups of propensity-matched patients

Author:

Rokui Sorush1ORCID,Gottschalk Byron1,Peng Defen12,Groenewoud Rosalind1,Ye Jian1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Division of Cardiac Surgery, St Paul’s Hospital and University of British Columbia , Vancouver, BC, Canada

2. Centre for Cardiovascular Innovation, University of British Columbia , Vancouver, BC, Canada

Abstract

Abstract OBJECTIVES Prothesis choice in isolated mitral valve replacement for patients aged 75 years or younger remains debated as most studies comparing prothesis type have included large proportions of combined operations and benefits are influenced by concomitant procedures. This study compared long-term outcomes of isolated mechanical versus bioprosthetic mitral valves in different age groups of propensity-matched populations. METHODS This is a retrospective, multicentre, propensity-matched observational study. Baseline characteristics, operative details and long-term outcomes (mortality and freedom from surgical/transcatheter reintervention) were collected. RESULTS Totally, 1536 isolated mitral valve replacements (806 mechanical, 730 bioprosthetic) were performed between 2000 and 2017. Over 90% of eligible patients successfully underwent propensity matching, yielding 226 each of mechanical and bioprosthetic valves in patients aged <65 years and 171 each of bioprosthetic and mechanical valves in patients aged 65–75 years with median follow-up of 13 years (maximum 20 years). In matched patients <65 years, 10-year survival was superior with mechanical valves versus bioprosthetic valves (78.2% vs 69.8%, P = 0.029), as was 10-year freedom from reintervention (96.2% vs 81.3%, P < 0.001). For matched patients between 65 and 75 years, there were no differences between mechanical and bioprosthetic valves in 10-year survival (64.6% vs 60.8%, P = 0.86) or 10-year freedom from reintervention (94.0% vs 97.2%, P = 0.23). Rates of post-operative stroke, gastrointestinal bleeding, renal failure and permanent pacemaker insertion were similar. CONCLUSIONS In patients requiring isolated mitral valve replacement, mechanical valves confer significantly better long-term survival and freedom from reintervention for patients <65 years, while no benefit is observed at age 65–75 years compared to bioprosthetic valves.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Reference19 articles.

1. 2020 ACC/AHA guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines;Otto;Circulation,2021

2. A step-by-step guide to transseptal valve-in-valve transcatheter mitral valve replacement;Harloff;Ann Cardiothorac Surg,2021

3. Survival and outcomes following bioprosthetic vs mechanical mitral valve replacement in patients aged 50 to 69 years;Chikwe;JAMA,2015

4. Bioprosthetic vs. mechanical mitral valve replacement for rheumatic heart disease in patients aged 50–70 years;Yu;Front Cardiovasc Med,2022

5. Prosthetic choice in mitral valve replacement for severe chronic ischemic mitral regurgitation: long-term follow-up;Bernard;J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg,2023

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3