Mechanical Valve Replacement Versus Bioprosthetic Valve Replacement in the Tricuspid Valve Position
Key result
Mechanical tricuspid valve replacement shows comparable 10-year survival and valve-related events versus bioprosthetic valves.
- P=0.004 (unadjusted); 0.084 (adjusted)
- n=104
Why the study?
Does mechanical tricuspid valve replacement improve survival or reduce valve-related events compared to bioprosthetic valve replacement in patients with tricuspid valvular disease?
Population
104 consecutive patients with tricuspid valvular disease (71 women; mean age 57 ± 10.8 years)
Comparison
Mechanical tricuspid valve replacement (n=59) vs Bioprosthetic tricuspid valve replacement (n=45)
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
median 49.9 months (range 0-230 months)
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Should not yet change tricuspid valve selection; extends observational data but leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
Study Design
Type
Cohort (n=104)
Structured PICO
Does mechanical tricuspid valve replacement improve survival or reduce valve-related events compared to bioprosthetic valve replacement in patients with tricuspid valvular disease?
P
Population
104 patients (68.3% female, mean age 57 years) with tricuspid valvular disease undergoing mechanical or bioprosthetic valve replacement, followed for a median of 49.9 months.
E
Exposure
Mechanical tricuspid valve replacement (n=59)
C
Comparator
Bioprosthetic tricuspid valve replacement (n=45)
O
Outcome
Hospital mortality and 10-year actuarial survivalhard clinical
Main Result
Absolute Event Rate: 83.9% vs 61.4%
p-value: p=0.004 (unadjusted); 0.084 (adjusted)
Mechanical tricuspid valve replacement appears to have comparable long-term survival and valve-related event rates to bioprosthetic replacement after adjusting for baseline differences.
Cite This Study
Cho et al. (2013) conducted a cohort in Tricuspid valvular disease (n=104). Mechanical tricuspid valve replacement vs. Bioprosthetic tricuspid valve replacement was evaluated on 10-year actuarial survival (p=0.004 (unadjusted); 0.084 (adjusted)). Mechanical tricuspid valve replacement was not inferior to bioprosthetic replacement for valve-related events and showed no significant difference in adjusted 10-year survival (P=0.084).