Hospital readmission rates are similar between patients with mechanical versus bioprosthetic aortic valves

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate hospital readmission rates and clinical outcomes between bioprosthetic (bAVR) and mechanical (mAVR) aortic valve replacements (AVR). METHODS: Adults aged 50 years or older undergoing isolated or concomitant AVR between 2011 and 2017 were included. The primary outcome was 5-year hospital readmission. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the risk-adjusted impact of bAVR versus mAVR on outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 2981 patients were included: 406 (14%) mAVR and 2575 (86%) bAVR. Mean follow-up was 2.9 ± 1.9 years. Operative mortality was comparable (4% bAVR vs 3% mAVR; P = 0.30). There was no risk-adjusted difference in 30-day (hazard ratio [HR] 1.32, P = 0.46), 1-year (HR 1.17, P = 0.52), or 5-year mortality (HR 0.99, P = 0.93). Aortic valve 5-year reoperation rates were comparable (1%, P = 0.32). Risk-adjusted hospital readmissions were similar at 30 days (14% vs 15%; P = 0.63), 1 year (30% vs 27%; P = 0.43), and 5 years (55% vs 53%; P = 0.83) in the bAVR and mAVR groups, respectively. Similar findings were demonstrated when evaluating readmissions for bleeding (5-year readmission: 8% bAVR vs 10% mAVR; P = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of over 2900 AVRs, readmissions within 5 years were comparable between groups at approximately 50%, with patients being at highest risk in the early postdischarge period. Readmissions for bleeding constituted a minority of all readmissions for both cohorts.