Key result
Bioprosthetic valves show no difference versus mechanical in survival or events after tricuspid valve replacement.
Why the study?
Does bioprosthetic tricuspid valve replacement improve clinical outcomes compared to mechanical valves in patients requiring tricuspid valve replacement?
Population
104 patients undergoing 121 tricuspid valve replacements between January 1966 and December 2002, mostly in…
Comparison
Bioprosthetic tricuspid valve replacement vs Mechanical tricuspid valve replacement
Design
Cohort
Authors
Loading...
Supports equivalent bioprosthetic or mechanical valve selection after tricuspid replacement; leaves open randomized trials to confirm given high perioperative mortality.
Cohort (n=104)
Does bioprosthetic tricuspid valve replacement improve clinical outcomes compared to mechanical valves in patients requiring tricuspid valve replacement?
Bioprosthetic and mechanical tricuspid valves demonstrate similar long-term survival and valve-related events, though their modes of failure differ, with bioprostheses failing more predictably.
Solomon et al. (2004) conducted a cohort in Tricuspid valve replacement (n=104). Bioprosthetic valve vs. Mechanical valve was evaluated on Valve-related events, deaths, and long term survival. Bioprosthetic and mechanical valves showed no significant differences in valve-related events or survival after tricuspid valve replacement, which had an overall perioperative mortality of 19%.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: