Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement-Age-Dependent Choice of Prosthesis Type.
Vitanova, Keti; Wirth, Felix; Boehm, Johannes; Burri, Melchior; Lange, Rüdiger; Krane, Markus.
Afiliação
  • Vitanova K; Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, German Heart Center Munich, Technische Universität München, 80636 Munich, Germany.
  • Wirth F; Insure (Institute of Translational Cardiac Surgery), Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, German Heart Center Munich, Technische Universität München, 80636 Munich, Germany.
  • Boehm J; Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, German Heart Center Munich, Technische Universität München, 80636 Munich, Germany.
  • Burri M; Insure (Institute of Translational Cardiac Surgery), Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, German Heart Center Munich, Technische Universität München, 80636 Munich, Germany.
  • Lange R; Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, German Heart Center Munich, Technische Universität München, 80636 Munich, Germany.
  • Krane M; Insure (Institute of Translational Cardiac Surgery), Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, German Heart Center Munich, Technische Universität München, 80636 Munich, Germany.
J Clin Med ; 10(23)2021 Nov 26.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34884256
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Recently, the use of surgically implanted aortic bioprostheses has been favoured in younger patients. We aimed to analyse the long-term survival and postoperative MACCE (Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebral Event) rates in patients after isolated aortic valve replacement.

METHODS:

We conducted a single-centre observational retrospective study, including all consecutive patients with isolated aortic valve replacement. 11 propensity score matching of the preoperative baseline characteristics was performed.

RESULTS:

A total of 2172 patients were enrolled in the study. After propensity score matching the study included 428 patients 214 biological vs. 214 mechanical prostheses, divided into two subgroups group A < 60 years and group B > 60 years. The mean follow-up time was 7.6 ± 3.9 years. Estimated survival was 97 ± 1.9% and 89 ± 3.4% at 10 years for biological and mechanical prosthesis, respectively in group A (p = 0.06). In group B the survival at 10 years was 79.1 ± 5.8% and 69.8 ± 4.4% for biological and mechanical prosthesis, respectively (p = 0.83). In group A, patients with a bioprosthesis exhibited a tendency for higher cumulative incidence MACCE rates compared to patients with a mechanical prosthesis, p = 0.83 (bio 7.3 ± 5.3% vs. mech 4.6 ± 2.2% at 10 years). In group B, patients with a mechanical prosthesis showed a tendency for higher cumulative incidence MACCE rates compared to patients with bioprosthesis, p = 0.86 (bio 4.3 ± 3.1% vs. mech 9.1 ± 3.1% at 10 years).

CONCLUSIONS:

Long-term survival after surgical aortic valve replacement is similar in patients with a biological and mechanical prosthesis, independent of the patients' age. Moreover, younger patients (<60 years) with bioprosthesis showed a survival benefit, compared to patients with mechanical prosthesis in this age group.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article