Comparative analysis of structural valve deterioration after bioprosthetic tricuspid valve replacement: Bovine pericardial versus porcine valves

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This study was conducted to compare the occurrence and the risk factors of structural valve deterioration (SVD) after bioprosthetic tricuspid valve replacement (TVR) between bovine pericardial valves and porcine valves. One-hundred and thirty-four TVR patients were enrolled; 108 patients underwent TVR with bovine pericardial bioprostheses (BTVR group) and 26 underwent TVR with porcine bioprostheses (PTVR group). The early results and long-term clinical outcomes were compared. The median follow-up duration was 90 (interquartile range: 33-135) months. Propensity score (PS) adjusted Cox regression and competing risk analyses were performed. The mean ages of the BTVR and PTVR groups were 62.2 ± 10.7 and 57.3 ± 13.9 years, respectively. The overall survival and cumulative incidence of cardiac death in the BTVR group were similar to those in the PTVR group (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 1.399 [0.500-3.922] and 0.742 [0.249-2.212], respectively). SVD was significantly more frequent in the BTVR group (17.544 [1.070-243.902], P =.045). The tricuspid valve reoperation rate was significantly higher in the BTVR group (38.462 [2.591-476.190], P =.008). The cumulative incidence of SVD after bioprosthetic TVR was higher when using bovine pericardial valves than when using porcine valves.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)911-918
Number of pages8
JournalArtificial Organs
Volume45
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2021

Keywords

  • bioprosthetic
  • bovine pericardial valve
  • porcine valve
  • prosthesis
  • tricuspid valve

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative analysis of structural valve deterioration after bioprosthetic tricuspid valve replacement: Bovine pericardial versus porcine valves'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this