Key result
Bovine pericardial valve replacement showed no significant difference in the cumulative incidence of structural valve deterioration compared to porcine bioprostheses (P=0.23).
Why the study?
This study aimed to compare long-term outcomes, including durability, between bovine pericardial and porcine bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement.
Does bovine pericardial valve replacement reduce structural valve deterioration and improve long-term clinical outcomes compared to porcine bioprosthesis in patients undergoing mitral valve replacement?
Cohort (n=309)
Does bovine pericardial valve replacement reduce structural valve deterioration and improve long-term clinical outcomes compared to porcine bioprosthesis in patients undergoing mitral valve replacement?
Absolute Event Rate: 13.7% vs 25%
p-value: p=0.23
Long-term clinical outcomes and structural valve deterioration rates are similar between bovine pericardial and porcine bioprosthetic valves for mitral valve replacement.
Supports similar durability of bovine and porcine valves in mitral replacement; leaves open need for randomized confirmation of outcomes.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare long-term outcomes, including durability, after bovine pericardial valve replacement with those after porcine mitral valve replacement (MVR). METHODS: We enrolled 309 patients who underwent MV replacement (mean age: 65.8±11.5 years; 68.9% females) with Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT bovine pericardial valves (bovine MVR group, n=241) or Hancock II porcine bioprosthesis (porcine MVR group, n=68). The mean clinical and echocardiographic follow-up durations were 81.4±60.0 and 57.8±53.3 months, respectively. Structural valve deterioration (SVD) was defined as prosthetic mitral valve (MV) regurgitation or stenosis of greater than moderate degree combined with a motion limitation, tear, or perforation of prosthetic valve leaflet on follow-up echocardiography. Propensity score (PS)-adjusted multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS: Thirty-day mortality rate was 6.4% (20/309 patients). SVD occurred in 50 patients (33 and 17 patients in the bovine and porcine MV replacement groups, respectively). Cumulative incidences of SVD at 5, 10, and 15 years were 3.2%, 15.9%, and 32.4%, respectively, in the bovine MVR group and 1.9%, 15.3%, and 41.7%, respectively, in the porcine MVR group. Cumulative incidences of SVD in the two groups were not different in competing risk analysis (P=0.23). Other clinical outcomes including overall survival and cumulative incidences of cardiac death and MV-related events were not statistically significantly different between the groups in PS-adjusted multivariable analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term clinical outcomes including SVD were not different between the bovine and porcine bioprosthesis MVR groups during average 7 years of clinical follow-up after MVR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Mitral valve replacement (n=309). Bovine pericardial valve replacement vs. Porcine mitral valve replacement was evaluated on Structural valve deterioration (SVD) (p=0.23). Bovine pericardial valve replacement showed no significant difference in the cumulative incidence of structural valve deterioration compared to porcine bioprostheses (P=0.23).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: