Key result
Porcine and pericardial bioprosthetic valves for pulmonary valve replacement in adults yielded comparable freedom from intervention at eight years (93.8% vs 100%; P=0.407).
Why the study?
Postcongenital heart surgery pulmonary regurgitation requires subsequent pulmonary valve replacement, but the comparative outcomes between porcine and pericardial bioprosthetic valves were uncertain.
Does porcine bioprosthesis compared to pericardial bioprosthesis improve outcomes in adults undergoing pulmonary valve replacement for pulmonary regurgitation after congenital cardiac surgery?
Population
82 adult patients with pulmonary regurgitation following initial congenital cardiac surgery
Comparison
Porcine bioprosthetic valves vs pericardial valves
Design
Retrospective single-center study
Follow-up
Mean 5.02 ± 2.06 vs 4.08 ± 3.21 years
Authors
Loading...
Comparable midterm outcomes support either bioprosthesis for adult PVR; leaves open long-term durability differences.
Cohort (n=82)
No
Does porcine bioprosthesis compared to pericardial bioprosthesis improve outcomes in adults undergoing pulmonary valve replacement for pulmonary regurgitation after congenital cardiac surgery?
Absolute Event Rate: 93.8% vs 100%
p-value: p=0.407
Both porcine and pericardial bioprosthetic valves provide satisfactory and comparable midterm outcomes for pulmonary valve replacement in adults with prior congenital cardiac surgery.
Yuen et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Pulmonary regurgitation following initial congenital cardiac surgery (n=82). Porcine bioprosthetic valves vs. Pericardial bioprosthetic valves was evaluated on Freedom from intervention at eight years (p=0.407). Porcine and pericardial bioprosthetic valves for pulmonary valve replacement in adults yielded comparable freedom from intervention at eight years (93.8% vs 100%; P=0.407).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: