Cargando…

Pericardial Versus Porcine Valves for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There still are controversies on which type between bovine pericardial and porcine valves is superior in the setting of aortic valve replacement (AVR). This study aims to compare clinical outcomes of AVR using between pericardial or porcine valves. METHODS: The study invol...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shin, Hong Ju, Kim, Wan Kee, Kim, Jin Kyoung, Kim, Joon Bum, Jung, Sung-Ho, Choo, Suk Jung, Chung, Cheol Hyun, Lee, Jae Won
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society of Cardiology 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8819572/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35043606
http://dx.doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2021.0223
_version_ 1784646085509120000
author Shin, Hong Ju
Kim, Wan Kee
Kim, Jin Kyoung
Kim, Joon Bum
Jung, Sung-Ho
Choo, Suk Jung
Chung, Cheol Hyun
Lee, Jae Won
author_facet Shin, Hong Ju
Kim, Wan Kee
Kim, Jin Kyoung
Kim, Joon Bum
Jung, Sung-Ho
Choo, Suk Jung
Chung, Cheol Hyun
Lee, Jae Won
author_sort Shin, Hong Ju
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There still are controversies on which type between bovine pericardial and porcine valves is superior in the setting of aortic valve replacement (AVR). This study aims to compare clinical outcomes of AVR using between pericardial or porcine valves. METHODS: The study involved consecutive 636 patients underwent isolated AVR using stented bioprosthetic valves between January 2000 and May 2016. Of these, pericardial and porcine valves were implanted in 410 (pericardial group) and 226 patients (porcine group), respectively. Clinical outcomes including survival, structural valve deterioration (SVD) and trans-valvular pressure gradient were compared between the groups. To adjust for potential selection bias, inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was conducted. RESULTS: The mean follow-up duration was 60.1±50.2 months. There were no significant differences in the rates of early mortality (3.1% vs. 3.1%; p=0.81) and SVD (0.3%/patient-year [PY] vs. 0.5%/PY; p=0.33) between groups. After adjustment using IPTW, however, landmark mortality analyses showed a significantly lower late (>8 years) mortality risk in pericardial group over porcine group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% confidence interval, [CI] 0.41–0.90; p=0.01) while the risks of SVD were not significantly difference between groups (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.12–1.70; p=0.24). Mean pressure gradient across prosthetic AV was lower in the Pericardial group than the Porcine group at both immediate postoperative point and latest follow-up (p values <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing bioprosthetic surgical AVR, bovine pericardial valves showed superior results in terms of postoperative hemodynamic profiles and late survival rates over porcine valves.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8819572
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher The Korean Society of Cardiology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88195722022-02-15 Pericardial Versus Porcine Valves for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Shin, Hong Ju Kim, Wan Kee Kim, Jin Kyoung Kim, Joon Bum Jung, Sung-Ho Choo, Suk Jung Chung, Cheol Hyun Lee, Jae Won Korean Circ J Original Research BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There still are controversies on which type between bovine pericardial and porcine valves is superior in the setting of aortic valve replacement (AVR). This study aims to compare clinical outcomes of AVR using between pericardial or porcine valves. METHODS: The study involved consecutive 636 patients underwent isolated AVR using stented bioprosthetic valves between January 2000 and May 2016. Of these, pericardial and porcine valves were implanted in 410 (pericardial group) and 226 patients (porcine group), respectively. Clinical outcomes including survival, structural valve deterioration (SVD) and trans-valvular pressure gradient were compared between the groups. To adjust for potential selection bias, inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was conducted. RESULTS: The mean follow-up duration was 60.1±50.2 months. There were no significant differences in the rates of early mortality (3.1% vs. 3.1%; p=0.81) and SVD (0.3%/patient-year [PY] vs. 0.5%/PY; p=0.33) between groups. After adjustment using IPTW, however, landmark mortality analyses showed a significantly lower late (>8 years) mortality risk in pericardial group over porcine group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% confidence interval, [CI] 0.41–0.90; p=0.01) while the risks of SVD were not significantly difference between groups (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.12–1.70; p=0.24). Mean pressure gradient across prosthetic AV was lower in the Pericardial group than the Porcine group at both immediate postoperative point and latest follow-up (p values <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing bioprosthetic surgical AVR, bovine pericardial valves showed superior results in terms of postoperative hemodynamic profiles and late survival rates over porcine valves. The Korean Society of Cardiology 2021-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8819572/ /pubmed/35043606 http://dx.doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2021.0223 Text en Copyright © 2022. The Korean Society of Cardiology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Shin, Hong Ju
Kim, Wan Kee
Kim, Jin Kyoung
Kim, Joon Bum
Jung, Sung-Ho
Choo, Suk Jung
Chung, Cheol Hyun
Lee, Jae Won
Pericardial Versus Porcine Valves for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement
title Pericardial Versus Porcine Valves for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement
title_full Pericardial Versus Porcine Valves for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement
title_fullStr Pericardial Versus Porcine Valves for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement
title_full_unstemmed Pericardial Versus Porcine Valves for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement
title_short Pericardial Versus Porcine Valves for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement
title_sort pericardial versus porcine valves for surgical aortic valve replacement
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8819572/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35043606
http://dx.doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2021.0223
work_keys_str_mv AT shinhongju pericardialversusporcinevalvesforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement
AT kimwankee pericardialversusporcinevalvesforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement
AT kimjinkyoung pericardialversusporcinevalvesforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement
AT kimjoonbum pericardialversusporcinevalvesforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement
AT jungsungho pericardialversusporcinevalvesforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement
AT choosukjung pericardialversusporcinevalvesforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement
AT chungcheolhyun pericardialversusporcinevalvesforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement
AT leejaewon pericardialversusporcinevalvesforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement