Why the study?
Structural bioprosthetic valve degeneration is an unpreventable and untreatable condition whose underlying pathophysiological mechanisms remain largely unknown.
What are the pathophysiological mechanisms leading to structural bioprosthetic valve degeneration in patients with biological heart valves?
What are the pathophysiological mechanisms leading to structural bioprosthetic valve degeneration in patients with biological heart valves?
Understanding the multifaceted mechanisms of structural bioprosthetic valve degeneration is crucial for developing preventive treatments and engineering more durable biological tissues.
Biological heart valves (BHVs) are currently the main prosthetic substitute used to treat patients with severe valvular heart diseases. Unlike mechanical valves, BHVs provide better hemodynamic profile and lower thrombogenicity. However, their durability remains one of the main concerns in the field. Structural bioprosthetic valve degeneration (SVD) is a progressive phenomenon occurring early postimplantation and characterized by the fibro-calcification of the BHV leaflets, which leads to BHV failure over ∼10 years. SVD is currently an unpreventable and untreatable condition occurring in all BHV. The pathophysiological mechanisms leading to the development and progression of SVD remain largely unknown. However, a better understanding of these mechanisms will provide valuable data to improve BHV durability via the development of preventive treatments and/or newly engineered biological tissues. In this review, we provide a contemporary overview of the complex and interrelated pathophysiological mechanisms leading to SVD. We discussed the relevant studies in the fields, addressing the role of (i) the biomaterial structure and manufacturing processes, (ii) the active cell-mediated fibro-calcific processes, (iii) the residual immunogenicity of the currently animal-derived biomaterial, and (iv) the subclinical thrombosis, in the development and progression of SVD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sallé et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: