Patient–prosthesis mismatch associated with somatic growth after mechanical mitral valve replacement in small children: metrics for reoperation and outcomes

Mitral valve replacement in children: balancing durability and risk with mechanical and bioprosthetic valves

OBJECTIVES

To investigate if there is still a place for bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement in children by comparing the prosthetic durability and transplant-free survival after bioprosthetic and mechanical mitral valve replacement.

METHODS

We reviewed all mitral valve replacements in children between 1981 and 2020. Bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement cases were individually matched to mechanical mitral valve replacement cases. The incidence rate of a 2nd replacement was calculated using the cumulative incidence function that considered death or transplantation as a competing risk.

RESULTS

The median age at implantation was 3.6 years (interquartile range 0.8-7.9) for the bioprosthetic valve cohort (n = 28) and 3 years (interquartile range 1.3-7.8) for the mechanical valve cohort (n = 28). Seven years after bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement, the cumulative incidence of death or transplantation was 17.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.3-34.1] and the cumulative incidence of a 2nd replacement was 63.6% (95% CI 39.9-80.1). Seven years after mechanical mitral valve replacement, the cumulative incidence of death or transplantation was 28.6% (95% CI 13.3-46) and the cumulative incidence of a 2nd replacement was 10.7% (95% CI 2.6-25.5). Fifteen years after mechanical mitral valve replacement, the cumulative incidence of death or transplantation was 33.6% (95% CI 16.2-52.1) and the cumulative incidence of a 2nd replacement was 41.1% (95% CI 18.4-62.7). The cumulative incidence curves for bioprosthetic and mechanical mitral valve replacement were statistically different for a 2nd valve replacement (P < 0.001) but not for death or transplantation (P = 0.33).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no difference in transplant-free survival after bioprosthetic and mechanical mitral valve replacement in children. The lifespan of bioprosthetic mitral valves remains limited in children because of structural valve failure due to calcification. After 15 years, 40% of mechanical valves were replaced, primarily because of patient-prosthesis mismatch related to somatic growth.

Pediatric pulmonary valve replacements: Clinical challenges and emerging technologies

Congenital heart diseases (CHDs) frequently impact the right ventricular outflow tract, resulting in a significant incidence of pulmonary valve replacement in the pediatric population. While contemporary pediatric pulmonary valve replacements (PPVRs) allow satisfactory patient survival, their biocompatibility and durability remain suboptimal and repeat operations are commonplace, especially for very young patients. This places enormous physical, financial, and psychological burdens on patients and their parents, highlighting an urgent clinical need for better PPVRs. An important reason for the clinical failure of PPVRs is biofouling, which instigates various adverse biological responses such as thrombosis and infection, promoting research into various antifouling chemistries that may find utility in PPVR materials. Another significant contributor is the inevitability of somatic growth in pediatric patients, causing structural discrepancies between the patient and PPVR, stimulating the development of various growth-accommodating heart valve prototypes. This review offers an interdisciplinary perspective on these challenges by exploring clinical experiences, physiological understandings, and bioengineering technologies that may contribute to device development. It thus aims to provide an insight into the design requirements of next-generation PPVRs to advance clinical outcomes and promote patient quality of life.