Fard A, Mahmood Z, Nair S, Shaikhrezai K, Al-Attar N. Analysis of incidence and reasons for re-intervention after aortic valve replacement using the Trifecta aortic bioprosthesis.
Curr Probl Cardiol 2022;
48:101125. [PMID:
35114295 DOI:
10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2022.101125]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2022] [Accepted: 01/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
Trifecta bioprosthesis claims favourable haemodynamic performance. However, reports of structural valve deterioration (SVD) raise concerns of its long-term durability. We assessed outcomes with the Trifecta valve over a 10-year period.
METHODS
All patients receiving Trifecta bioprostheses between October 2011 and October 2020 were included. Perioperative and survival characteristics were prospectively collated in an independent database. Re-intervention was recorded as a surrogate for SVD.
RESULTS
944 patients (mean age 72.82 years ± 8.13, 58% male) underwent aortic valve replacement with the Trifecta valve. At 10-years, 1.4% of patients required a redo operation, giving an overall freedom from re-intervention of 98.6%. The mean time to re-intervention was 48.87 months. Survival was 73.58% and 76.92% in patients who did not require re-intervention vs re-intervention group, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
In a large, single-centre cohort, the Trifecta aortic bioprosthesis had a 1.4% all-cause re-intervention rate at 10-years, with insignificant impact on survival.
Collapse