Early results with composite strut caged ball prostheses

Event status of the Starr-Edwards aortic valve to 20 years: a benchmark for comparison

BACKGROUND

Considerable effort and expense has been invested in the evolutionary development of cardiac valvular prostheses with the goal of reducing or minimizing specific events related to these prostheses. It is important to measure any improvement achieved with such development by comparison against a historic standard. The Starr-Edwards caged-ball prosthesis model 1260 has been used for 30 years as the predominant or sole model of its kind for aortic valve replacement. This historic opportunity provides a benchmark for subsequent improvement and comparison of current prostheses.

METHODS

Between 1969 and 1991, 1,100 patients (median age, 57 years; 838 men and 194 women) underwent aortic valve replacement with or without coronary artery bypass grafting (aortic valve replacement, 964; aortic valve replacement plus coronary artery bypass grafting, 136) with the 1260 Starr-Edwards caged-ball prosthesis.

RESULTS

Operative mortality was 6.2% (68 patients). Univariate patient characteristics predictive of early mortality were female sex (p = 0.003), age (> 56 years; p = 0.002), recent operative interval (1985 to 1991 versus 1969 to 1976 or 1977 to 1984; p = 0.002), presence of atrial fibrillation (p = 0.001), and small valve size (7A to 8A = 19 to 21 mm; p < 0.001). Follow-up extended to 11,293 patient-years (mean, 24.8 years) and was 96.9% complete. Survival at 5, 10, 15, and 20 years for all patients including operative mortality was 76.6%, 59.6%, 44.9%, and 31.2%, respectively. Operative variables predictive of poor late survival were advanced New York Heart Association class (III or IV); (p = 0.0001), older age (> 56 years; p = 0.0001), and lower (< 0.56) ejection fraction (p = 0.0001). Freedom from thromboemboli and anticoagulant-related bleeding at 5 years was 90.8% and 98.7%, respectively. Univariate model for greater risk of late thromboemboli identified female sex (p = 0.04), older age (> 56 years; p = 0.0002), and New York Heart Association class III or IV (p = 0.0058), as risk factors. Multivariate analysis for thromboemboli demonstrated older age (p = 0.0007) and New York Heart Association class III or IV (p = 0.0041) as significant. Alternatively, univariate analysis for late bleeding found only the most recent operative interval (p = 0.009) as significant, and the rarity of events prevented a multivariate query. There were no valve failures.

CONCLUSIONS

The late results of survival and freedom from late anticoagulant-related bleeding or thromboemboli are excellent, especially in larger (9A and above) sizes, and with the long implant record comparable with more recent prostheses, the Starr-Edwards valve provides an excellent, safe, and durable alternative in the aortic position and provides a benchmark against which to compare other prostheses.

Prosthetic heart valves: a review

There are a number of difficulties inherent in the analysis of such a large and diverse quantity of data. In a substantial number of clinical trials, there is no significant effort made to evaluate prosthetic performance as a function of preoperative cardiac anatomy. Hemodynamics have not been systematically studied in relation to preexisting left ventricular size, shape, or configuration, mitral annular orientation, or left atrial size. Postoperative anticoagulation protocols vary from one institution to another and occasionally within study groups themselves. Less tangible variables such as alteration in surgical technique over time and differential familiarity of cardiovascular surgeons with the prostheses employed are chronic problems in any study of this sort. Perhaps the greatest variable in evaluating the postoperative performance of valvular prostheses over the past 20 yr is the radical improvement in techniques of intraoperative myocardial preservation. Notwithstanding, comparisons are possible within the confines of certain criteria. The caged ball value remains in use after 20 years of clinical experience. It has sustained the greatest number of modifications, probably because it has been the most extensively studied. Hemodynamics are adequate although its centrally obstructed design is responsible for increased turbulence, hemolysis, and neointimal proliferation, particularly in the aortic position. The device has been shown to be durable with virtually no reports of ball variance since the alteration of the silicone curing procedure in 1965. Thromboembolic rates are acceptable in the anticoagulated patient while prosthetic thrombosis is not a grave threat in the non-close clearance device. Incidence of endocarditis is not particularly different from that associated with all nonbioprosthetic valves, although there is a much greater published volume of clinical experience concerning recognition and treatment of late prosthetic valve endocarditis in patients with caged ball valves than there is for any other replacement device. Perhaps the most serious disadvantage to caged ball design is its size. Its large spatial requirements have led to anatomic complications in patients with small aortic roots, isolated mitral stenosis, left ventricular hypertrophy, and double valve replacement, among others. Nevertheless, this is still the valve of choice in some centers.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Bioengineering aspects of heart valve replacement

Biomedical engineering inputs have been important in the design, development and testing of substitute heart valves as well as in the pre- and post-operative management of patients with cardiac valve disease. This paper is a review of heart valve replacement whose goal is the enhancement of future bioengineering contributions. We review the approach to the patient with valvular heart disease, and the sources of early and late postoperative pathology with emphasis on complications of the prostheses used. Major significant problem areas relate to the noninvasive evaluation of cardiovascular function (both before and after surgery), device design, hemodynamics, and the need for thromboresistant and durable materials.

Medium-term follow-up of the Ionescu-Shiley heterograft valve

Utilizing a questionnaire specifically designed to uncover potential thromboembolic episodes, we personally interviewed 97 patients who underwent valve replacement with the Ionescu-Shiley valve between January, 1977, and June, 1980. In both the aortic and mitral positions, the attrition rate after the first year was low; cumulative survival at 3 to 4 years was 78% (aortic) and 61% (mitral). None of the deaths were attributed to primary valve failure. Patients with aortic prostheses, none of whom were anticoagulated, had a cumulative thromboembolism-free rate of 94% at 3 to 4 years. Patients with mitral prostheses had a thromboembolism-free rate of 71% at 3 to 4 years with 80% of the episodes occurring in patients in atrial fibrillation. Most emboli produced only transient symptoms, and only 1 patient has residual impairment. The Ionescu-Shiley valve performs well in the early years after valve replacement. Anticoagulation should be strongly considered for patients with mitral prostheses who are in atrial fibrillation.