Cargando…

Trifecta versus Perimount Magna Ease aortic valves: Failure mechanisms

BACKGROUND: There are increasing reports of early externally mounted pericardial Trifecta bioprosthesis failure. We compared the hemodynamic performance of Trifecta and Carpentier–Edwards Perimount Magna Ease valves to determine the failure mechanism. METHODS: We retrospectively included 270 consecu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Suzuki, Ryo, Ito, Toshiro, Suzuki, Masato, Ohori, Shunsuke, Takayanagi, Ryo, Miura, Shiro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9373186/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35603636
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02184923221100994
_version_ 1784767547728461824
author Suzuki, Ryo
Ito, Toshiro
Suzuki, Masato
Ohori, Shunsuke
Takayanagi, Ryo
Miura, Shiro
author_facet Suzuki, Ryo
Ito, Toshiro
Suzuki, Masato
Ohori, Shunsuke
Takayanagi, Ryo
Miura, Shiro
author_sort Suzuki, Ryo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There are increasing reports of early externally mounted pericardial Trifecta bioprosthesis failure. We compared the hemodynamic performance of Trifecta and Carpentier–Edwards Perimount Magna Ease valves to determine the failure mechanism. METHODS: We retrospectively included 270 consecutive patients (age: 73.4 ± 8.2 years; 57.5% male; mean follow-up: 48.0 ± 20.3 months) who underwent aortic valve replacement from 2014 to 2021 at a single center and compared the Trifecta (N = 137) and Carpentier–Edwards Perimount Magna Ease valve (N = 133) patients. RESULTS: The prosthetic valve major aortic regurgitation incidence was higher for the Trifecta than that for the Carpentier–Edwards Perimount Magna Ease valve (6.3% vs. 0%, P < 0.009). Among the Trifecta failures, 33% developed structural valve deterioration, but all requiring redo aortic valve replacement developed major prosthetic valve aortic regurgitation. Freedom at 5 years from redo aortic valve replacement due to structural valve deterioration was significantly lower for Trifecta (89.4% vs. 100%, P = 0.003). The reoperation hazards were determined for Trifecta (vs. Carpentier–Edwards Perimount Magna Ease): 11.6 (1.47–90.9; P = 0.02), prosthetic valve aortic regurgitation: 2.38 (1.70–3.32; P < 0.01), structural valve deterioration: 20.82 (4.08–106.2; P < 0.01), 5-year mean transprosthetic pressure gradient: 1.14 per 1-point increase (1.03–1.24; P = 0.007), and urgent surgery: 10.1 (2.59–39.0; P = 0.001). The Cox regression analysis identified that prosthetic valve aortic regurgitation solely contributed to redo aortic valve replacement (hazard ratio: 2.38; confidence intervals: 1.70–3.32). CONCLUSIONS: Significantly, more early failures occurred with the Trifecta valve than the Carpentier–Edwards Perimount Magna Ease valve but the Trifecta showed reasonable mean transprosthetic pressure gradient over time. Prosthetic valve aortic regurgitation and calcific structural valve deterioration synergistically contributed to Trifecta valve failure alternatively.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9373186
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93731862022-08-13 Trifecta versus Perimount Magna Ease aortic valves: Failure mechanisms Suzuki, Ryo Ito, Toshiro Suzuki, Masato Ohori, Shunsuke Takayanagi, Ryo Miura, Shiro Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann Original Articles BACKGROUND: There are increasing reports of early externally mounted pericardial Trifecta bioprosthesis failure. We compared the hemodynamic performance of Trifecta and Carpentier–Edwards Perimount Magna Ease valves to determine the failure mechanism. METHODS: We retrospectively included 270 consecutive patients (age: 73.4 ± 8.2 years; 57.5% male; mean follow-up: 48.0 ± 20.3 months) who underwent aortic valve replacement from 2014 to 2021 at a single center and compared the Trifecta (N = 137) and Carpentier–Edwards Perimount Magna Ease valve (N = 133) patients. RESULTS: The prosthetic valve major aortic regurgitation incidence was higher for the Trifecta than that for the Carpentier–Edwards Perimount Magna Ease valve (6.3% vs. 0%, P < 0.009). Among the Trifecta failures, 33% developed structural valve deterioration, but all requiring redo aortic valve replacement developed major prosthetic valve aortic regurgitation. Freedom at 5 years from redo aortic valve replacement due to structural valve deterioration was significantly lower for Trifecta (89.4% vs. 100%, P = 0.003). The reoperation hazards were determined for Trifecta (vs. Carpentier–Edwards Perimount Magna Ease): 11.6 (1.47–90.9; P = 0.02), prosthetic valve aortic regurgitation: 2.38 (1.70–3.32; P < 0.01), structural valve deterioration: 20.82 (4.08–106.2; P < 0.01), 5-year mean transprosthetic pressure gradient: 1.14 per 1-point increase (1.03–1.24; P = 0.007), and urgent surgery: 10.1 (2.59–39.0; P = 0.001). The Cox regression analysis identified that prosthetic valve aortic regurgitation solely contributed to redo aortic valve replacement (hazard ratio: 2.38; confidence intervals: 1.70–3.32). CONCLUSIONS: Significantly, more early failures occurred with the Trifecta valve than the Carpentier–Edwards Perimount Magna Ease valve but the Trifecta showed reasonable mean transprosthetic pressure gradient over time. Prosthetic valve aortic regurgitation and calcific structural valve deterioration synergistically contributed to Trifecta valve failure alternatively. SAGE Publications 2022-05-22 2022-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9373186/ /pubmed/35603636 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02184923221100994 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Articles
Suzuki, Ryo
Ito, Toshiro
Suzuki, Masato
Ohori, Shunsuke
Takayanagi, Ryo
Miura, Shiro
Trifecta versus Perimount Magna Ease aortic valves: Failure mechanisms
title Trifecta versus Perimount Magna Ease aortic valves: Failure mechanisms
title_full Trifecta versus Perimount Magna Ease aortic valves: Failure mechanisms
title_fullStr Trifecta versus Perimount Magna Ease aortic valves: Failure mechanisms
title_full_unstemmed Trifecta versus Perimount Magna Ease aortic valves: Failure mechanisms
title_short Trifecta versus Perimount Magna Ease aortic valves: Failure mechanisms
title_sort trifecta versus perimount magna ease aortic valves: failure mechanisms
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9373186/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35603636
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02184923221100994
work_keys_str_mv AT suzukiryo trifectaversusperimountmagnaeaseaorticvalvesfailuremechanisms
AT itotoshiro trifectaversusperimountmagnaeaseaorticvalvesfailuremechanisms
AT suzukimasato trifectaversusperimountmagnaeaseaorticvalvesfailuremechanisms
AT ohorishunsuke trifectaversusperimountmagnaeaseaorticvalvesfailuremechanisms
AT takayanagiryo trifectaversusperimountmagnaeaseaorticvalvesfailuremechanisms
AT miurashiro trifectaversusperimountmagnaeaseaorticvalvesfailuremechanisms