Long-term outcomes of patients undergoing mechanical versus bioprosthetic aortic root replacement.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the impact of valve type (mechanical vs. bioprosthetic) on survival after aortic root replacement (ARR). METHODS: In a propensity-matched analysis, we evaluated consecutive operations from 2010 to 2018. Patients were identified using a prospectively maintained institutional database. Patients with infective endocarditis were excluded. Kaplan-Meier survival estimation and multivariable Cox regression analysis were performed. Cox regression adjusted for age, sex, baseline comorbidities, and operative variables. Propensity score matching yielded 153 pairs of patients. RESULTS: A total of 893 patients were identified. We excluded 192 patients with endocarditis and evaluated 701 patients. Of these patients, 455 (64.9%) received a bioprosthetic valve, 246 (35.1%) received a mechanical valve. Median follow-up was 4.06 years. The proportion of aortic dissections and circulatory arrest as well as cardiopulmonary bypass and ischemic times were similar across groups (p = .207, p = .086, p = .668, p = .454, respectively). Operative mortality was significantly higher in the bioprosthetic valve group (7.9% vs. 2.4%, p = .004). Total length of hospital stay was longer (11.4 ± 11.0 vs. 9.5 ± 10.1, p < .001) and there was a higher proportion of prolonged postoperative ventilation >24 h (21.3% vs. 13.0%, p = .007) in the bioprosthetic group. Postoperative outcomes were similar, regarding stroke (p = .077), re-exploration for bleeding (p = .211), new dialysis requirement (p = .077), long-term bleeding complications (p = .561), and reoperations (p = .755). Mechanical valve replacement was associated with improved long-term survival (adjusted HR 0.42, 95% CI: 0.23-0.77, p = .005). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that mechanical valves for ARRs may confer a survival benefit over bioprosthetic valves. Surgeon bias was likely to account for this survival advantage.

Outcomes of Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Few studies have reported their experience in explantation of a transcatheter heart valve. We found 2,100 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) from 2013 through 2021. Of 2,100, a total of 17 patients underwent surgical aortic valve replacement after TAVI, including surgical bailout. The mean age was 78.3 years. Co-morbidities were very frequent, including coronary artery disease (70.6%), atrial fibrillation (52.9%), cerebrovascular disease (47.1%), and pulmonary hypertension (41.2%). A history of cardiac surgery was observed in 6 patients (35.3%). The mean predicted risk of mortality at the time of TAVI was 7.7%. Surgical bailout was the most common indication of valve explantation (n = 8, 47.1%), followed by infective endocarditis (n = 4, 23.5%) and paravalvular leak (n = 2, 11.8%). The valve-in-valve TAVI was not feasible because of endocarditis, paravalvular leak, and history of valve-in-valve TAVI. Overall, 13 (76.5%) were performed urgently or emergently, and 10 (58.9%) required aortic root reconstruction. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass time was 158.5 minutes. In-hospital mortality was 41.2%. Transcatheter heart valve explantation continues to be rare; however, these data will continue to be informative as TAVI explantations will become more common with time.