Carpentier-Edwards supraannular porcine bioprosthesis: second-generation prosthesis in aortic valve replacement

Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in a High-Risk Patient with a Biocor Bioprosthesis and a Flail Prosthetic Valve Leaflet

An 80-year-old woman with a history of surgical aortic valve replacement with a 21 mm St. Jude Medical Biocorporcine aortic valve 14 years prior presented with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III symptoms, severeaortic insufficiency from a degenerated prosthesis, and a large echocardiographic mobile mass representing a highlymobile prosthetic leaflet. The patient worsened to NYHA class IV symptoms despite medical management. The Societyof Thoracic Surgery mortality risk score was extremely high. However, a valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was found to be a reasonable option. We used a 20 mm SAPIEN 3 Ultra value (Edwards Lifesciences Inc., Irvine, CA, USA) with a SENTINEL embolic protection device (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA). During valve deployment, the echocardiographic mobile mass was visually pinned between the new TAVR valve and the surgical bioprosthetic valve. No large embolic debris was noted within the embolic protection device, and the patient remained without any new focal neurologic deficits in the perioperative period and at the 30-day follow-up. The severe aortic insufficiency resolved, and the patient clinically improved to NYHA class II symptoms.

Possible Link Between the ABO Blood Group of Bioprosthesis Recipients and Specific Types of Structural Degeneration

Background Pigs/bovines share common antigens with humans: α-Gal, present in all pigs/bovines close to the human B-antigen; and AH-histo-blood-group antigen, identical to human AH-antigen and present only in some animals. We investigate the possible impact of patients' ABO blood group on bioprosthesis structural valve degeneration (SVD) through calcification/pannus/tears/perforations for patients ≤60 years at implantation. Methods and Results This was a single-center study (Paris, France) that included all degenerative bioprostheses explanted between 1985 and 1998, mostly porcine bioprostheses (Carpentier-Edwards second/third porcine bioprostheses) and some bovine bioprostheses. For the period 1998 to 2014, only porcine bioprostheses with longevity ≥13 years were included (total follow-up ≥29 years). Except for blood groups, important predictive factors for SVD were prospectively collected (age at implantation/longevity/number/site/sex/SVD types) and analyzed using logistic regression. All variables were available for 500 explanted porcine bioprostheses. By multivariate analyses, the A group was associated with an increased risk of: tears (odds ratio[OR], 1.61; P=0.026); pannus (OR, 1.5; P=0.054), pannus with tears (OR, 1.73; P=0.037), and tendency for lower risk of: calcifications (OR, 0.63; P=0.087) or isolated calcification (OR, 0.67; P=0.17). A-antigen was associated with lower risk of perforations (OR 0.56; P=0.087). B-group patients had an increased risk of: perforations (OR, 1.73; P=0.043); having a pannus that was calcified (OR, 3.0, P=0.025). B-antigen was associated with a propensity for calcifications in general (OR, 1.34; P=0.25). Conclusions Patient's ABO blood group is associated with specific SVD types. We hypothesize that carbohydrate antigens, which may or may not be common to patient and animal bioprosthetic tissue, will determine a patient's specific immunoreactivity with respect to xenograft tissue and thus bioprosthesis outcome in terms of SVD.

Recipients with blood group A associated with longer survival rates in cardiac valvular bioprostheses

Background

Pigs/bovines share with humans some of the antigens present on cardiac valves. Two such antigens are: the major xenogenic Ag, “Gal” present in all pig/bovine very close to human B-antigen of ABO-blood-group system; the minor Ag, pig histo-blood-group AH-antigen identical to human AH-antigen and present by some animals. We hypothesize that these antigens may modify the immunogenicity of the bioprosthesis and also its longevity. ABO distribution may vary between patients with low (<6 years) and high (≥15 years) bioprostheses longevity.

Methods

Single-centre registry study (Paris, France) including all degenerative porcine bioprostheses (mostly Carpentier-Edwards 2nd/3rd generation heart valves) explanted between 1985 and 1998 and some bovine bioprostheses. For period 1998–2014, all porcine bioprostheses with longevity ≥13 years (follow-up ≥29 years). Important predictive factors for bioprosthesis longevity: number, site of implantation, age were collected. Blood group and other variables were entered into an ordinal logistic regression analysis model predicting valve longevity, categorized as low (<6 years), medium (6–14.9 years), and high (≥15 years).

Findings

Longevity and ABO-blood group were obtained for 483 explanted porcine bioprostheses. Mean longevity was 10.2 ± 3.9 years [0–28] and significantly higher for A-patients than others (P = 0.009). Using multivariate analysis, group A was a strong predictive factor of longevity (OR 2.09; P < 0.001). For the 64 explanted bovine bioprosthesis with low/medium longevity, the association, with A-group was even more significant.

Interpretation

Patients of A-group but not B have a higher longevity of their bioprostheses. Future graft-host phenotyping and matching may give rise to a new generation of long-lasting bioprosthesis for implantation in humans, especially for the younger population.

Fund

None.

Aortic valve replacement in small patients

OBJECTIVES

Asians are smaller than Europeans and North Americans, but aortic valve replacement (AVR) in small patients has not been examined. We aimed to compare short- and mid-term outcomes of AVR between small and non-small patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively divided 173 patients who underwent AVR into small (S, n = 95) and non-small (NS, n = 78) groups according to body surface area (≤1.6 in men, ≤1.5 in women) and analyzed differences in baseline characteristics, procedural and post-procedural variables, and survival.

RESULTS

Mean age differed significantly between the S and NS groups (71.9 ± 11.2 vs. 66.2 ± 9.8 years), as did the proportion of women (60.0% vs. 24.4%). Implanted valves (19.6 ± 1.6 mm vs. 20.7 ± 1.7 mm) were significantly smaller and more bioprosthetic valves (57.9% vs. 41.0%) were used in the S group. Effective orifice area index and the rate of moderate and severe patient-prosthesis mismatch were not significantly different. No significant intergroup differences were found in hospitalization duration, 30-day mortality, survival rates, or valve related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Small patients were older and the proportion of women was higher. The implanted aortic valves were smaller and more were biological prostheses. However, mortality rate did not differ and short- and mid-term outcomes were safe and favorable.

15-Year Comparison of Supra-Annular Porcine and PERIMOUNT Aortic Bioprostheses

The second-generation Carpentier-Edwards bioprostheses, the supra-annular porcine valve and the PERIMOUNT pericardial valve, have been evaluated longitudinally for several years. This study compared clinical performance over 15 years. Aortic valve replacement was performed with a supra-annular porcine valve in 1,823 patients (group 1) aged 19–89 years (mean, 68.9 ± 10.9 years) and with a PERIMOUNT pericardial bioprosthesis in 1,430 patients (group 2) aged 16–90 years (mean, 69.5 ± 10.4 years). The groups were similar except for concomitant coronary artery bypass in 43% of group 1 and 18% of group 2 ( p < 0.001). Overall survival at 15 years was 29.3% ± 1.5% for group 1 and 35.2% ± 3.1% for group 2 ( p = 0.0009). The actual freedom from valve-related mortality was 88.5% ± 0.9% for group 1 and 84.9% ± 1.7% for group 2. The actual freedom from structural valve deterioration at 15 years was similar overall, and for patients aged > 60 years, between the groups, but was dissimilar (group 2 > group 1) for age ≤ 60 years. The predictors of structural valve deterioration were valve type (group 1 > group 2), sex (male > female), age, and concomitant coronary artery bypass. Both bioprostheses provided satisfactory clinical performance at 15 years after aortic valve replacement.

Late Mortality and Morbidity in Elderly Patients with Mechanical Heart Valves

A retrospective study was performed in patients under and over 65 years old implanted with a mechanical valve, to compare late mortality and morbidity. Of 381 patients who underwent mechanical valve replacement at Nagoya University in the 1990s, 357 (11 hospital deaths and 13 lost to follow-up; 96.4% follow-up rate) were followed up for 7.9 ± 3.3 years (2,811 patient-years). They were divided into two groups either side of 65 years of age at operation. The young and elderly patient groups contained 275 and 82 patients, respectively. The survival rate in the young group was 96.1% (95% confidence interval, 93.7%–98.5%) at 5 years and 92.0% (95% confidence interval, 88.3%–95.7%) at 10 years, which was significantly better than 88.0% (95% confidence interval, 80.6%–95.4%) at 5 years and 73.8% (95% confidence interval, 66.2%–85.4%) at 10 years in the elderly group. The two groups did not differ significantly in the incidence of thromboembolic events, bleeding events, endocarditis, or reoperation. We are also encouraged by the fact that mechanical valves are not a risk factor for late mortality or morbidity, even in elderly patients.

Comparison of Quality of Life Perceived by Patients with Bioprosthetic versus Mechanical Valves after Composite Aortic Root Replacement

Objective: To assess whether postoperative quality of life (QOL) for composite aortic root replacement patients differs according to whether it is based on the use of mechanical valves or bioprosthetic valves. Methods: The study included 146 consecutive patients who underwent composite aortic root replacement at our institution from January 2010 to April 2014 with bioprosthetic (34.9%, n = 51) and mechanical (65.1%, n = 95) valves. Patient-perceived QOL was measured by administering the Short Form (SF)-36v2 Health Survey and a series of supplemental questions to further evaluate valve-specific differences. Final survey participation (n = 121) included 82.9% of the qualifying patients, and involved 76.5% (39/51) of those with bioprosthetic valves and 86.3% (82/95) of those with mechanical valves. Reasons for not completing the survey included 5 expired patients (3.4%), 1 lost due to a language barrier (0.7%), 6 who refused to participate (4.1%) and 13 who were lost to follow-up (8.9%). The mean follow-up time was 32 months (range 4-56 months). Results: Patients in the bioprosthetic valve group were older (mean age 67.5 ± 13.6 years) and included more females (25.6% or 10/39) than those in the mechanical valve group (mean age 56.6 ± 12.0 years; 11.0% or 9/82 were female). No significant differences were found between the bioprosthetic and mechanical valve groups for any QOL aspects scored by the SF-36v2 survey. All 8 domains and 2 summary scales comprising the QOL evaluation were above national norms calculated using gender- and age-matched, norm-based scoring for a standard national average of 50. The supplemental questions indicated satisfaction with each valve type despite characteristics that were of concern to patients. In the mechanical valve group, 90.2% (74/82) reported that the audible valve click was not troublesome, 85.4% (70/82) that taking a blood thinner regularly did not affect daily life and 81.7% (67/82) that blood testing for anticoagulation therapy was not troublesome. Conclusions: Receiving a tissue or a mechanical valve does not directly affect postoperative QOL. Answers to supplemental questions suggest that prior concerns with mechanical valves do not affect patients in the commonly anticipated negative manner. The preconception of a heavy QOL burden for mechanical composite grafts is contradicted by this study.

Clinical evaluation of new heart valve prostheses: update of objective performance criteria

This article summarizes the long-term clinical results of the Food and Drug Administration-approved heart valves, provides current updates to the objective performance criteria (OPC) used to evaluate new heart valve prostheses, and documents the steps that the International Organization for Standardization Committee used to arrive at the updated OPC. Data were extracted from 19 Food and Drug Administration summaries of safety and effectiveness data reports (31 series) and 56 literature articles (85 series) published from 1999 to 2012. The OPC were calculated for five valve-related complications by valve type (mechanical and bioprosthetic) and valve position (aortic and mitral).

Randomized trial of carpentier-edwards supraannular prosthesis versus mosaic aortic prosthesis: 6 year results

BACKGROUND

This study prospectively compares the clinical performance of 2 stented porcine aortic bioprostheses: the Carpentier-Edwards supraannular aortic valve (CE-SAV) from Edwards Lifesciences (Irvine, CA) and the Mosaic valve from Medtronic Corp (Minneapolis, MN). We believe it is the only study of this kind.

METHODS

Four hundred three patients undergoing bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (AVR) between January 2001 and March 2005 were prospectively randomized to receive either the CE-SAV (n = 197) or the Mosaic (n = 206) prosthesis. All patients are being followed annually.

RESULTS

The patients in the 2 groups were comparable with respect to their preoperative demographics, EuroSCORE, and their intraoperative characteristics concerning cardiopulmonary bypass. The mean follow-up period was 6 ± 0.25 years, with a total follow-up of 2,418 patient-years. There have been a total of 64 (32.5%) deaths in the group receiving CE-SAV valves and 85 (41.3%) deaths in the group receiving Mosaic valves. The 5-year survival in the 2 groups was 77.7 % and 73.3%, respectively (p = 0.36). There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of structural valve deterioration (SVD) (p = 0.16), paraprosthetic leak (p = 0.13), thromboembolism (p = 0.25), endocarditis (p = 0.68), and freedom from reoperation at 5 years (p = 0.27). Echocardiographic data suggests a trend for lower valve gradients across the 23-mm CE-SAV prostheses compared with similar-sized Mosaic prostheses.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no statistically significant differences in the clinical performance between CE-SAV and Mosaic aortic prostheses at 6 years after implantation.

Root replacement with stentless Freestyle bioprostheses for active endocarditis: a single centre experience

OBJECTIVES

Few studies have examined the use of stentless Freestyle bioprostheses in patients with active valve endocarditis (VE). The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of stentless Freestyle bioprostheses in patients undergoing full-root replacement.

METHODS

From February 2000 to June 2010, 180 patients with VE underwent cardiac surgery at our institution, of which 71 (39.5%) had prosthetic VE. Eighteen patients underwent full-root replacement with Freestyle bioprostheses: 3 patients (16%) had native aortic VE, 14 (78%) had aortic prosthetic VE and 1 (6%) had mitral and aortic prosthetic VE. Mean age was 66.7 ± 10.1, M/F: 6/12, mean logistic EuroSCORE 36.4 ± 21.6. Eight patients (42%) underwent concomitant procedures (two mitral valve replacements, three ascending aorta replacements, one coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), one ventricular septal disease (VSD) repair, one CABG + ascending aorta + VSD repair).

RESULTS

Two patients (11%) died in-hospital. At the median follow-up of 24 months (range 1-113 months), no death occurred and freedom from reoperation was 87.5% (2 patients for aortic root pseudo-aneurysm at 1 and 23 months). All patients are in NYHA functional class I and have satisfactory echocardiographic data (EF 54.3 ± 8%, peak and mean trans-prosthetic gradients 12 ± 6.7 mmHg and 7.5 ± 3.6 mmHg) with 100% freedom recurrence of VE.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience shows that root replacement with Freestyle stentless bioprostheses in patient with VE, is associated with low rates of early and mid-term mortality, good haemodynamic performance and low rates of valve-related morbidity as well as low recurrence of infection.

Redo surgery risk in patients with cardiac prosthetic valve dysfunction

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to analyse the risk factors of early and late mortality in patients undergoing the first reoperation for prosthetic valve dysfunction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective observational study was performed in 194 consecutive patients (M = 75, F = 119; mean age 53.2 ±11 years) with a mechanical prosthetic valve (n = 103 cases; 53%) or bioprosthesis (91; 47%). Univariate and multivariate Cox statistical analysis was performed to determine risk factors of early and late mortality.

RESULTS

The overall early mortality was 18.6%: 31.4% in patients with symptoms of NYHA functional class III-IV and 3.4% in pts in NYHA class I-II. Multivariate analysis identified symptoms of NYHA class III-IV and endocarditis as independent predictors of early mortality. The overall late mortality (> 30 days) was 8.2% (0.62% year/patient). Multivariate analysis identified age at the time of reoperation as a strong independent predictor of late mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Reoperation in patients with prosthetic valves, performed urgently, especially in patients with symptoms of NYHA class III-IV or in the case of endocarditis, bears a high mortality rate. Risk of planned reoperation, mostly in patients with symptoms of NYHA class I-II, does not differ from the risk of the first operation.

Usefulness of microsimulation to translate valve performance into patient outcome: Patient prognosis after aortic valve replacement with the Carpentier–Edwards supra-annular valve

OBJECTIVE

Numerous reports have been published documenting the results of aortic valve replacement. It is often not easy to translate these outcomes involving the condition of the valve into the actual consequences for the patient. We previously developed an alternative method to study outcome after aortic valve replacement that allows direct estimation of patient outcome after aortic valve replacement: microsimulation modeling. The goal of this article is to provide insight into microsimulation methodology and to give an overview of the advantages and disadvantages of simulation methods (in particular microsimulation) in comparison with standard methods of outcome analysis.

METHODS

By using a primary dataset containing 1847 patients and 14,429 patient-years, advantages and disadvantages of standard methods of outcome analysis are discussed, and the potential role of microsimulation is illustrated by means of a step-by-step explanation of building, testing, and using such a model.

RESULTS

Total life expectancy, event-free life expectancy, and reoperation-free life expectancy for a 65-year-old male patient were 10.6 years, 9.2 years, and 9.8 years, respectively. Lifetime risk of reoperation due to structural valve deterioration was 13.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Microsimulation is capable of providing accurate estimates of age-related life expectancy and lifetime risk of reoperation for patients who underwent aortic valve replacement with the Carpentier-Edwards supra-annular valve. It provides a useful tool to facilitate and optimize the choice for a specific heart valve prosthesis in a particular patient.

Hemodynamic performance of the Medtronic Mosaic porcine bioprosthesis up to ten years

BACKGROUND

The Mosaic bioprosthesis (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) is a third-generation stented porcine bioprosthesis combining physiologic fixation and amino oleic acid antimineralization treatment to improve hemodynamic performance and durability. The findings of this single-center experience with this valve were evaluated to determine the clinical and hemodynamic performance.

METHODS

Between February 1994 and October 1999, we enrolled 255 patients with aortic valve replacement (AVR) with a mean age of 67 years (range, 23 to 82 years) and 47 patients with mitral valve replacement (MVR) with a mean age of 67 years (range, 41 to 84 years) in this post-United States Food and Drug Administration approval prospective and nonrandomized clinical trial. Patients were followed-up, including serial echocardiographic assessment, within 30 days, at 6 months, and annually thereafter. The cumulative follow-up was 1540 patient-years for AVR (mean, 6.1 years; maximum, 10 years) and 250 patient-years for MVR (mean, 5.4 years, maximum; 10 years).

RESULTS

Early mortality after AVR (<30 days) was 0.8%; late mortality per patient-year was 3.5%, including a valve-related/unexplained mortality of 1.1%. Early mortality after MVR (<30 days) was 0.0%; late mortality per patient-year was 2.8%, including a valve-related/unexplained mortality of 1.2%. Median postoperative gradient and effective orifice area for all valves after AVR were (early, n = 252; 5 years, n = 161; 9 years, n = 43) 13.7, 12.3, and 11.7 mm Hg and 1.9, 1.8, and 1.8 cm2 at early, 5 years, and 9 years, respectively. With MVR respective data were (early, n = 46; 5 years, n = 25; 7 years, n = 13) 4.6, 4.1, and 3.9 mm Hg and 1.8, 2.2, and 2.3 cm2. At 10 years, freedom from adverse events in the AVR group and MVR group was, respectively, thromboembolism, 86.6% +/- 6.6% and 86.3% +/- 9.8%; permanent neurologic event, 91.2% +/- 6.8% and 90.9% +/- 8.7%; valve thrombosis, 98.2% +/- 0.8% and 100%; structural valve deterioration, 87.1% +/- 6.7% and 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our midterm results demonstrate clinical safety and good performance of the Mosaic bioprosthesis. Continued follow-up will determine if this new design will provide increased durability.

A 10-year comparison of explanted Hancock-II and Carpentier–Edwards supraannular bioprostheses

BACKGROUND

Bioprosthetic heart valves are more frequently being used in valve replacement procedures today. Although second-generation bioprosthetic valves have improved functionality over their first-generation counterparts, they still often fail due to primary tissue degeneration.

METHODS

This study examines two second-generation porcine valves after surgical explantation, the Hancock-II (HAN; Medtronic Heart Valve Division, Irvine, CA, USA) and the Carpentier-Edwards supraannular (CE-SAV; Baxter Healthcare Corporation, now Edwards LifeSciences, Irvine, CA, USA), with special attention to morphological/histological changes and reasons for valve failure. A total of 98 HAN and 65 CE-SAV valves were explanted and seen over a 10-year period.

RESULTS

CE-SAV valves had a longer average implant duration than HAN valves (13.9+/-3.9 years vs. 10.0+/-5.1 years). Compared with HAN valves, CE-SAV valves also had a higher incidence of stent deformation (41.5% vs. 14.3%), calcification (75.4% vs. 54.1%), and pannus (100% vs. 91.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

The greater degenerative changes seen with CE-SAV valves over HAN valves may be due to the longer implant duration of CE-SAV valves in this series. To our knowledge, the present study is the first direct morphological comparison of these two valve models.

Carpentier-Edwards supra-annular aortic porcine bioprosthesis: Clinical performance over 20 years

OBJECTIVE

Experience with the Carpentier-Edwards supra-annular porcine bioprosthesis (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, Calif) has been evaluated longitudinally over 20 years. Clinical performance was evaluated by actuarial and actual analysis. Hemodynamic performance was evaluated by echocardiographic/Doppler assessment. Morphology of structural failure was evaluated from pathologic examinations.

METHODS

From 1981 through 1999, 1823 patients (mean age, 68.9 +/- 10.9 years; range, 19-89 years) underwent 1847 procedures. Concomitant coronary artery bypass was performed in 788 (42.7%) patients. Previous valve procedures were performed in 107 (5.8%) patients, and other cardiac procedures were performed in 87 (4.7%) patients.

RESULTS

The overall valve-related complication rate was 4.36% per patient-year (630 patients), with a fatality rate of 0.96% per patient-year (139 patients). Patient survival at 18 years was 15.8% +/- 1.6%. Overall late mortality rate was 6.3% per patient-year. Overall actual cumulative freedom at 18 years from reoperation was 85.0% +/- 1.2%, valve-related mortality was 88.7% +/- 1.1%, and valve-related residual morbidity was 96.3% +/- 5.0%. Actual freedom from structural valve deterioration at 18 years was 86.4% +/- 1.2% overall, 90.5% +/- 1.8% for age 61 to 70 years, and 98.2% +/- 0.6% for age greater than 70 years. Structural valve deterioration presented with pathologic evidence consistent with stenosis in 27.6% and insufficiency in 72.4%. Hemodynamic performance at 1 year revealed normal effective orifice area indexes for sizes 23 to 27 mm and mild-to-moderate reduction for size 21 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

The Carpentier-Edwards supra-annular aortic porcine bioprosthesis continues to provide excellent freedom from structural valve deterioration and overall freedom from valve-related residual morbidity, mortality, and reoperation up to 18 years. Hemodynamic performance is satisfactory. The prosthesis remains recommended for patients older than 70 years and for patients 61 to 70 years of age, especially when comorbid risk factors are not anticipated to provide extended survival.

Which biologic valve should we select for the 45- to 65-year-old age group requiring aortic valve replacement?

OBJECTIVE

The diversity of biologic valves available to replace the aortic valve renders selection difficult for the 45- to 65-year-old patient. To evaluate and compare the results of biologic valves in the 45- to 65-year-old patient, we reviewed our experience (1991-2004).

METHODS

Three hundred thirty-two patients between 45 and 65 years old with isolated aortic valve disease had a biologic valve implanted: Freestyle valve in 140 patients, a homograft in 54 patients, a stented Mosaic or Perimount valve (stented xenograft) in 62 patients, and a Ross procedure in 76 patients.

RESULTS

Perioperative mortality was comparable for all groups (Freestyle, 2.1%; homograft, 3.7%; stented xenograft, 3.2%; Ross procedure, 1.3%; P = .8). Echocardiographically determined valve performance at discharge was significantly enhanced in the Ross procedure and homograft groups (indexed effective orifice area: Freestyle, 0.9 +/- 0.3 cm 2 /m 2 ; homograft, 1.3 +/- 0.3 cm 2 /m 2 ; stented xenograft, 0.8 +/- 0.2 cm 2 /m 2 ; Ross procedure, 1.4 +/- 0.4; P < .0001; mean gradient: Freestyle, 12.0 +/- 6.6 mm Hg; homograft, 7.4 +/- 4.0 mm Hg; stented xenograft, 15.4 +/- 5.4 mm Hg; Ross procedure, 4.6 +/- 3.2 mm Hg; P < .0001). For all yearly follow-up, freedom from New York Heart Association class III or IV was comparable and greater than 95% for all groups. At 7 years, cardiac survival (homograft, 96.3% +/- 3.7%; Ross procedure, 90.6% +/- 6.3%; stented xenograft, 86.0% +/- 10.3%; Freestyle, 89.2% +/- 10.8%; P = .7) and freedom from reoperation (Ross procedure, 98.5% +/- 1.4%; homograft, 90.6% +/- 5.7%; Freestyle, 88.0% +/- 4.9%; stented xenograft, 90.0% +/- 8.0%; P = .4) were comparable. Freedoms from significant bleeding events, valve-related neurologic events, or endocarditis were comparable and greater than 95% for all groups.

CONCLUSION

Type of aortic biologic valve for the 45- to 65-year-old patient does not affect midterm survival or valve-related morbidity. Thus the choice of biologic valve for the 45- to 65-year-old patient should be dictated by patient-surgeon preference, ease of implantation, and reoperation until longer comparative studies are available.

Comparison of outcomes after aortic valve replacement with a mechanical valve or a bioprosthesis using microsimulation

BACKGROUND

Mechanical valves and bioprostheses are widely used for aortic valve replacement. Though previous randomised studies indicate that there is no important difference in outcome after implantation with either type of valve, knowledge of outcomes after aortic valve replacement is incomplete.

OBJECTIVE

To predict age and sex specific outcomes of patients after aortic valve replacement with bileaflet mechanical valves and stented porcine bioprostheses, and to provide evidence based support for the choice of prosthesis.

METHODS

Meta-analysis of published results of primary aortic valve replacement with bileaflet mechanical prostheses (nine reports, 4274 patients, and 25,726 patient-years) and stented porcine bioprostheses (13 reports, 9007 patients, and 54,151 patient-years) was used to estimate the annual risks of postoperative valve related events and their outcomes. These estimates were entered into a microsimulation model, which was employed to calculate age and sex specific outcomes after aortic valve replacement.

RESULTS

Life expectancy (LE) and event-free life expectancy (EFLE) for a 65 year old man after implantation with a mechanical valve or a bioprosthesis were 10.4 and 10.7 years and 7.7 and 8.4 years, respectively. The lifetime risk of at least one valve related event for a mechanical valve was 48%, and for a bioprosthesis, 44%. For LE and EFLE, the age crossover point between the two valve types was 59 and 60 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis based microsimulation provides insight into the long term outcome after aortic valve replacement and suggests that the currently recommended age threshold for implanting a bioprosthesis could be lowered further.

Durability of pericardial versus porcine aortic valves

OBJECTIVES

This study compares the long-term performance of the Carpentier-Edwards (CE) porcine bioprosthesis and the CE pericardial bioprosthesis for aortic valve replacement (AVR).

BACKGROUND

With new bioprostheses on the horizon, there is renewed interest in how the long-term durability of current pericardial bioprostheses compares with the traditional porcine bioprosthesis.

METHODS

We reviewed 518 AVR with CE porcine valves from 1974 to 1996 and 1,021 AVR with CE pericardial valves from 1991 to 2002. The age distribution and clinical profiles were similar for both groups. The total (mean) follow-up was 3,322 (6.4) years for porcine and 2,556 (2.5) years for pericardial.

RESULTS

Long-term mortality was similar (p = 0.29) for porcine and pericardial, with 10-year survival rates of 34 +/- 2% and 38 +/- 6%, respectively. Ten-year freedom from major adverse cardiac events was also similar for both (respectively): thromboembolism (80 +/- 2% and 87 +/- 2%; p = 0.24); endocarditis (98 +/- 1% and 99 +/- 1%; p = 0.30). However, 10-year freedom from explant was lower for porcine (90 +/- 2%) than for pericardial (97 +/- 1%, p = 0.04). Reasons for explant for porcine were structural valve deterioration (SVD) (n = 25), endocarditis (n = 4), and periprosthetic leak (n = 2). The reasons for explant for pericardial were SVD (n = 4), endocarditis (n = 4) and periprosthetic leak (n = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

The current CE pericardial valve offers better midterm durability than the traditional CE porcine valve. Its freedom from SVD and reoperation makes it our current bioprosthesis of choice for AVR in appropriately selected patients.

Hemodynamic and clinical outcomes with the biocor valve in the aortic position: an 8-year experience

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to analyze the 8-year experience, survival, prosthetic complications, and hemodynamics of patients who received the Biocor valve, a new-generation tissue valve, in the aortic position.

METHODS

From May 1992 through May 2001, 257 consecutive patients (129 women and 128 men; mean age, 75 +/- 6 years; age range, 45-91 years) received 258 aortic Biocor porcine prostheses. One female patient who received 2 Biocor valves in the aortic position during 2 consecutive operations was entered twice in the statistical analysis. Twelve (4.6%) patients had previous aortic valve operations. Preoperatively, 82 (32%) patients were in New York Heart Association functional class III or IV. Associated surgical procedures included coronary artery bypass grafting in 56 (21.7%) patients, aortic annular enlargement or aortoplasty in 20 (8%) patients, and others in 8 (3%) patients. Echocardiography was performed in the majority of long-term survivors (91.6%). Follow-up included 1215 patient-years and was 100% complete, with a median time of 5 patient-years (range, 0.4-10.5 years).

RESULTS

There were 16 (6.2%) early deaths. According to a univariate analysis, New York Heart Association functional class III or IV, concomitant procedures, ejection fractions of less than 40%, and urgent operations were identified as significant perioperative risk factors. At follow-up, 75 patients died; 8-year actuarial Kaplan-Meier survival was 48% +/- 5%. At 8 years, the actuarial freedom from valve-related death was 92% +/- 2.6%, the freedom from thromboembolism was 93% +/- 2%, the freedom from anticoagulant-related hemorrhage was 95% +/- 2%, the freedom from endocarditis was 99% +/- 0.6%, the freedom from paravalvular leak was 96% +/- 1.5%, the freedom from all valve-related complications was 78% +/- 4.5%, and the freedom from structural valve deterioration was 95% +/- 3.7%. At 8 years, the actuarial freedom from structural valve deterioration was 89% +/- 10% and 95.8% +/- 4% in patients younger and older than 65 years, respectively. At 10 years, in patients older than 65 years, the actual freedom from structural valve deterioration was 97.9% +/- 2.1%, and the freedom from reoperation was 97% +/- 1.3%. New York Heart Association status was I or II in 90% of patients at the end of follow-up. The mean echocardiographic follow-up time was 4.6 +/- 2 years. By using Doppler echocardiography, the peak and mean transprosthetic gradients were determined to be 30.8 +/- 9.3 mm Hg and 16.6 +/- 5.3 mm Hg, respectively. Mean mass/volume ratio and left ventricular end-diastolic volume were 1.37 +/- 0.17 g/mL and 63.4 +/- 22.6 mL/m(2), respectively. The majority of patients showed a persistent left ventricular hypertrophy.

CONCLUSION

The Biocor is an effective bioprosthesis with a low incidence of valve-related complications comparable with that of other second-generation bioprostheses. This stented porcine prosthesis provides satisfactory results in terms of hemodynamics, valve durability, and freedom from reoperation.

Advances in Heart Valve Surgery

Heart valve surgery continues to evolve in a dynamic fashion. While the exact role of minimally invasive approaches still needs to be defined, progress has been made in the development of new bioprostheses and their durability. Most importantly, valve repair has been standardized for the mitral and introduced for the aortic valve with results that have been superior to valve replacement. Selection of the optimal procedure for the individual patient is now facilitated. In the future, a wider application of repair procedures and further improvements of biologic valves can be anticipated not only to influence long-term results but also the decision-making process for conservative or surgical treatment.

Clinical and hemodynamic evaluation of small Perimount aortic valves in patients aged 75 years or older

BACKGROUND

There is the potential for iatrogenic aortic stenosis and poor quality of life when small aortic valve bioprostheses are used in elderly patients. The alternative is enlarging the aortic annulus to accommodate larger size prostheses, increasing operative mortality. It was hoped that bovine pericardial valves would improve hemodynamic performance in the smaller valve sizes.

METHODS

To determine long-term results and in vivo hemodynamic performance of small-size aortic Carpentier-Edwards bovine pericardial valves (Perimount) in elderly patients, we analyzed our follow-up and echocardiographic data from patients 75 years of age or older receiving isolated 19-mm and 21-mm Perimount valves. Ninety-four patients with a mean age of 77 +/- 2.2 years were followed for 12 years. Seventeen patients with 19-mm and 25 patients with 21-mm Perimount valves underwent transthoracic echocardiograms.

RESULTS

Operative mortality was 6.3% (6 of 94). Twelve-year survival was 82.7%. Freedom from thromboembolism was 86.9% at 12 years. Two patients had anticoagulation-related bleeding. Overall New York Heart Association class decreased from 3 +/- 1 to 1.6 +/- 0.7 at the end of follow-up. Hemodynamic performances were satisfactory in both 19-mm and 21-mm Perimount valves, with low peak and mean transvalvular gradients and good effective orifice areas, orifice area indices, and performance indices.

CONCLUSIONS

Perimount aortic valve in the small aortic annulus has yielded excellent long-term results and hemodynamic performances. Perimount is a very satisfactory option in elderly patients. Implantation of a Perimount bioprosthesis avoids enlargement of the small aortic annulus, reducing mortality and morbidity associated with this procedure.