Why the study?
Does a Bjork-Shiley mechanical heart valve improve survival and outcomes compared to a porcine bioprosthesis in patients undergoing valve replacement?
Population
533 patients undergoing mitral, aortic, or both valve replacement between 1975 and 1979 at a tertiary…
Comparison
Bjork-Shiley mechanical heart valve prosthesis vs Porcine bioprosthesis
Design
RCT, randomised
Follow-up
average 20 years
Authors
Loading...
Mechanical valves reduce reoperation risk without improving overall survival; confirms long-term durability advantage over bioprostheses in this RCT.
Does a Bjork-Shiley mechanical heart valve improve survival and outcomes compared to a porcine bioprosthesis in patients undergoing valve replacement?
At 20 years follow-up, mechanical valves offer better freedom from reoperation compared to bioprostheses, but at the cost of increased major bleeding, with no difference in overall survival.
Helen Oxenham (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: