Key result
Mechanical prostheses were associated with a lower risk of thromboembolism (1.5% vs 2.6% per patient-year; p<0.001) but increased bleeding (1.7% vs 1.1%; p=0.002) compared to bioprostheses.
Why the study?
Does a biological prosthesis compared to a mechanical prosthesis affect survival and valve-related morbidity in patients undergoing valve replacement?
Population
3,279 patients receiving either a mechanical or a biological prosthesis, stratified by age
Comparison
Biological prosthesis vs Mechanical prosthesis
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
21,644 patient-years total
Authors
Loading...
Mechanical valves link to lower thromboembolism but higher bleeding; leaves optimal prosthesis selection open pending randomized data.
Cohort (n=3,279)
Yes
Does a biological prosthesis compared to a mechanical prosthesis affect survival and valve-related morbidity in patients undergoing valve replacement?
Absolute Event Rate: 1.5% vs 2.6%
p-value: p=<0.001
In patients undergoing valve replacement, mechanical prostheses are associated with better survival in those <70 years and lower thromboembolism risk, but higher bleeding risk compared to bioprostheses.
Hellgren et al. (2011) conducted a cohort in Valve replacement (n=3,279). Mechanical prosthesis vs. Biological prosthesis was evaluated on Thromboembolism (p=<0.001). Mechanical prostheses were associated with a lower risk of thromboembolism (1.5% vs 2.6% per patient-year; p<0.001) but increased bleeding (1.7% vs 1.1%; p=0.002) compared to bioprostheses.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: