Key result
Trifecta bioprosthetic valve linked to ~23% structural valve degeneration over five years.
Why the study?
Although the Trifecta bioprosthetic valve is commonly used for SAVR, the rates of structural valve degeneration and failure remain debatable.
Cohort (n=271)
No
The Trifecta bioprosthetic valve is associated with a 4.8% failure rate and 23.2% degeneration rate over 5 years, corroborating concerns regarding its long-term durability.
Observed Trifecta SVD rates warrant surveillance but not practice change; leaves open comparative durability in prospective studies.
Introduction: The Trifecta bioprosthetic valve has been commonly used for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Multiple studies have been done to define the rate of structural valve degeneration (SVD) and failure (SVF), but the outcomes are still debatable. Therefore, we aim to conduct this single-center study to estimate the rate and predictors of SVD/SVF. Methodology: This retrospective observational cohort single-center study was conducted between 2014 and 2019 among Trifecta SAVR patients. Data were patient’s characteristics collected from electronic medical records at baseline and follow-up (3–5 years). Statistical analysis was performed with a significance level of P ≤ 0.05. Results: A total of 271 eligible patients were identified. Most of our sample were males (57.9%), with a mean age of 71.1 ± 10.6 years. The mean baseline preoperative ejection fraction (EF) was 53.0%, with no change ( P = 0.88) in the immediate postoperative EF (53.6%). A most recent follow-up EF revealed a significant increase of EF (55.2%), P = 0.01. Furthermore, there was a significant increase from peak velocity to PV MRE (mean difference [MD] ± standard error of mean (SEM) [0.15 ± 0.04], P < 0.01), an increase in pressure gradient (PG IPE ) to PG MRE (MD ± SEM [1.70 ± 0.49], P < 0.01), and a decrease in Doppler velocity index (DVI IPE ) to DVI MRE (MD ± SEM [−0.037 ± 0.01], P = 0.01). Regarding the SVF rate, 13 (4.8%) patients had failed valves requiring replacement throughout the study period. Conclusions: Over a 5-year follow-up period, 4.8% had SVF with an SVD of 23.2%, with the majority of SVD not being clinically significant except in six patients. These results corroborate with a previously published study suggesting a bad clinical outcome of Trifecta valve placement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hashem et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) (n=271). Trifecta bioprosthetic valve was evaluated on Structural valve failure (SVF) and structural valve degeneration (SVD). Over a 5-year follow-up, the Trifecta bioprosthetic valve was associated with a structural valve failure rate of 4.8% and a structural valve degeneration rate of 23.2%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: