Article Text
Abstract
Background Bioprosthetic valves are often used for pulmonary valve replacement (PVR) and tricuspid valve replacement (TVR) because of concerns about mechanical valve thrombosis in the right heart. The purpose of this study was to assess prosthetic valve function and outcomes (prosthetic valve dysfunction, reoperations and major bleeding events) after mechanical PVR and TVR and to compare these to bioprostheses implanted in the same positions.
Method Case–control study of adults with congenital heart disease that underwent mechanical TVR or PVR (2003–2021) at Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota. For each mechanical prosthesis, we identified two patients that received bioprosthesis in the same position (1:2 matching).
Results We identified 48 consecutive patients that underwent mechanical PVR (n=39, age 32 (26–38) years, men 22 (56%)) and/or mechanical TVR (n=17, age 36 (31–42) years, men 9 (53%)), as control group of 78 patients (age 30 (24–36) years, men 44 (56%)) and 34 patients (age 34 (29–39) years, men 18 (53%)) that underwent bioprosthetic PVR and TVR, respectively. The most common diagnoses in patients that received mechanical prosthesis were: tetralogy of Fallot (n=14, 19%), aortic stenosis status post Ross operation (n=11, 23%), truncus arteriosus (n=5, 11%), atrioventricular canal defect (n=4, 8%), Ebstein anomaly (n=3, 6%), double outlet right ventricle (n=2, 4%), valvular pulmonic stenosis (n=2, 4%). Compared with the bioprosthesis group, the mechanical prosthesis group had lower temporal increase in Doppler systolic mean gradient after PVR (∆ −1±2 vs 3±2 mm Hg, p<0.001) and Doppler diastolic mean gradient after TVR (∆ 0±1 vs 2±1 mm Hg, p=0.005). The mechanical prosthesis group also had lower risk of prosthetic valve dysfunction after PVR (1.0% vs 2.8% /year, p=0.02) and after TVR (2.6% vs 4.3% /year, p=0.008), but higher risk of major bleeding events (2.2% vs 0.1% /year, p<0.001).
Conclusions Patients that received right-sided mechanical valve prostheses had lower temporal increase in valve gradient, lower risk of prosthetic valve dysfunction, but higher risk of bleeding complications compared with those that underwent right-sided bioprosthetic valve implantation.
- Heart Defects, Congenital
- Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.
Footnotes
Twitter @Omaralahmady567, @YounisAhmedMD1
Contributors ACE was responsible for the planning, conduct, reporting, drafting and critical review of the manuscript and takes responsibility for the overall content. JD, WM, EHS, OA, AY, LB, CJ and HC were responsible for the drafting, critical review and final approval of the manuscript.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.