Key result
Mechanical valve replacement in young women yielded 70% 10-year survival versus 84% for bioprosthetic valves, with an adjusted relative risk of death of 2.17 (95% CI 0.78-5.88).
Why the study?
Does the type of cardiac valve replacement affect long-term patient survival, valve survival, and thromboembolic complications in young women?
Population
232 women aged 12 to 35 years who underwent cardiac valve replacements between 1972 and 1992
Comparison
Mechanical valve replacement vs Bioprosthetic or homograft valve replacement
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
1499 patient-years (up to 10 years reported)
Authors
Loading...
Mechanical valves were associated with lower survival in young women; leaves open optimal prosthesis choice pending randomized data.
Cohort (n=232)
No
Does the type of cardiac valve replacement affect long-term patient survival, valve survival, and thromboembolic complications in young women?
Relative Risk: 2.17 (95% CI 0.78–5.88)
Absolute Event Rate: 70% vs 84%
p-value: p=0.002
In young women, mechanical valves are associated with reduced long-term patient survival and higher thromboembolic risk compared to bioprosthetic valves, despite better 10-year valve survival, and pregnancy does not accelerate bioprosthetic valve deterioration.
North et al. (1999) conducted a cohort in Cardiac valve replacement (n=232). Mechanical valve replacement vs. Bioprosthetic valve replacement was evaluated on 10-year survival (RR 2.17, 95% CI 0.78-5.88, p=0.002). Mechanical valve replacement in young women yielded 70% 10-year survival versus 84% for bioprosthetic valves, with an adjusted relative risk of death of 2.17 (95% CI 0.78-5.88).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: