The Hancock II bioprosthesis at ten years

Midterm results after St Jude Medical Epic porcine xenograft for aortic, mitral, and double valve replacement

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the results after stented porcine xenograft implantation (Epic, SJM, St Paul, MN) with Linx anticalcification treatment in elderly patients at our high-volume tertiary care center.

METHODS

A total of 3825 patients undergoing aortic (AVR = 2441), mitral (MVR = 892), or double valve (DVR = 492) replacement between 11/2001 and 12/2017 with Epic xenografts were evaluated. Outcomes were assessed by reviewing the prospectively acquired hospital database results, and regular annual follow-up information was acquired from questionnaires or telephone interviews.

RESULTS

For patients undergoing AVR, MVR, DVR, age at surgery were 76.4 ± 6, 71.2 ± 9, 72.9 ± 8 years; active endocarditis was an indication for valve surgery in 4.5%, 20.7%, 19.7%; and the predicted median (interquartile range [IQR]) mortality risk (EuroSCORE II) was 5.2% (3.1%-9.4%), 7.5% (3.9%-16.2%), 9.9% (6.0%-19.6%), respectively. Median follow-up was 3.04 (IQR: 0.18-5.21). Thirty-day survival was 91.2% ± 0.6%, 87.6% ± 0.1.1%, 84.7% ± 1.6%; and 10-year survival was 56.7% ± 1.0%, 59.4% ± 2.5%, 50.45% ± 3.1%, respectively. Patients who underwent MVR versus AVR were at significant increased risk for reoperation for endocarditis (adjusted odds ratio; 2.2, 95% confidence interval; 1.29-3.7; P = .003). There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality at midterm in AVR vs MVR in the matched cohort (P = .85).

CONCLUSIONS

Implantation of the Epic stented porcine xenograft is associated with acceptable survival and freedom from valve-related complications or reoperation due to structural valve disease at midterm follow-up.

Carpentier-Edwards Bioprosthesis: Structural Deterioration by Age Groups

The Carpentier-Edwards supra-annular porcine bioprosthesis (second generation prosthesis) was implanted in 2438 patients in 2482 operations between 1982 and 1992. The mean age of the population was 64 years with a range from 21 years to 89 years. There were 1334 aortic and 934 mitral valve replacements. The population was divided into five groups: 21 to 40 years (n = 132); 41 to 50 years (n = 189); 51 to 60 years (n = 454); 61 to 70 years (n = 849); and over 70 years (n = 858). There was no difference in sunival by valve position for age groups 21 to 40 years and 41 to 50 years. Sunival within the age groups 51 to 60 years, 61 to 70 years, and over 70 years was greater for patients with aortic compared with mitral and multiple valve replacements. The freedom from structural valve deterioration at 10 years for all age groups was highest for valves in the aortic position. Patients with valves in the mitral position had a higher freedom from structural valve deterioration at 10 years than those who had multiple valve replacement, although not all the differences were significant. There was a lower incidence of structural valve deterioration in the older age groups. We concluded that the use of the Carpentier-Edwards supra-annular porcine bioprosthesis for aortic valve replacement can be extended to patients over 60 years of age, while its use for mitral valve replacement can be extended to those above 70 years of age.

Mid- to long-term outcome comparison of the Medtronic Hancock II and bi-leaflet mechanical aortic valve replacement in patients younger than 60 years of age: a propensity-matched analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare mid-long-term clinical outcomes between patients younger than 60 years of age undergoing bioprosthetic and mechanical aortic valve replacement.

METHODS

From January 2002 to December 2009, patients younger than 60 years of age who received Medtronic Hancock II porcine bioprostheses were selected and compared with those who received mechanical bi-leaflet valves in the aortic position. A stepwise logistic regression propensity score identified a subset of 112 evenly matched patient-pairs. Mid-long-term outcomes of survival, valve-related reoperations, thromboembolic events and bleeding events were assessed.

RESULTS

The follow-up was only 95.1% complete. Fourteen measurable variables were statistically similar for the matched cohort. Postoperative in-hospital mortality was 3.6% (bioprosthetic valves) and 2.7% (mechanical valves) (P = 0.700). Survival at 5 and 10 years was 96.3 and 88.7% for patients receiving bioprosthetic valve replacement versus 96.3 and 87.9% for patients receiving mechanical valve replacement (P = 0.860), respectively. At 5 and 10 years after operations, freedom from valve-related reoperation was 97.2 and 94.8% for patients receiving mechanical valve replacement, and 96.3 and 90.2% for patients receiving bioprosthetic valve replacement (P = 0.296), respectively. There was no difference between freedom from thromboembolic events (P = 0.528) and bleeding events (P = 0.128) between the matched groups during the postoperative 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients younger than 60 years of age undergoing aortic valve replacement, mid-long-term survival rate was similar for patients receiving bioprosthetic versus mechanical valve replacement. Bioprosthetic valves were associated with a trend for a lower risk of anticoagulation treatment and did not have significantly greater likelihood of a reoperation. These findings suggest that a bioprosthetic valve may be a reasonable choice for AVR in patients younger than 60 years of age.

Long-Term Clinical and Hemodynamic Performance of the Hancock II Versus the Perimount Aortic Bioprostheses

Background— The Medtronic Hancock II and the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount are among the world’s most commonly used aortic bioprostheses. However, a direct comparison of their clinical performance is lacking. To minimize biases inherent to between-center comparisons, we examined these prostheses within a large, contemporary, single-center cohort.

Methods and Results— Between 1990 and 2007, 1659 patients (mean age, 73.1±9.3 years) underwent aortic valve replacement with either the Hancock II (N=1021) or the Perimount (N=638). Patients were prospectively followed-up with serial clinic visits and echocardiograms for up to 16 years (mean, 5.0±3.3 years). There was no significant difference in aortic root size preoperatively ( P =0.7). Aortic root enlargement was more commonly performed with the Perimount ( P <0.001), and the manufacturer valve size of the implanted prosthesis was larger with the Hancock II ( P <0.001). Postoperatively, peak and mean transprosthesis gradients were higher for the Hancock II (32.7±0.7 and 16.0±0.3 mm Hg, respectively) than for the Perimount (24.9±0.7 and 13.4±0.4 mm Hg, respectively; P <0.001). However, no difference in left ventricular mass regression was observed at late follow-up ( P =0.9). Unadjusted 10-year survival was 59.4%±2.4% for the Hancock II and 70.2%±3.8% for the Perimount ( P =0.07). Multivariable predictors of survival did not include prosthesis type ( P =0.2).

Conclusions— For the same manufacturer valve size, the Perimount is larger, which may warrant enlarging the aortic root more often, and it is associated with better hemodynamics than the Hancock II. These differences do not impact survival or left ventricular mass regression, and the long-term clinical performances of the Hancock II and Perimount bioprostheses are equivalent.

Is repair of aortic valve regurgitation a safe alternative to valve replacement?

OBJECTIVE

To assess outcome of valve repair in patients with aortic valve regurgitation with emphasis on incidence and risk of reoperation.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 160 consecutive patients (127 men) who underwent aortic valve repair between 1986 and 2001. Ages ranged from 14 to 84 years (mean 55 +/- 17 years). Patients were categorized according to the main etiology of valve disease; 63 patients (39%) had annular dilation leading to central leakage, 54 (34%) had bicuspid valve, 34 (21%) with tricuspid valve had cusp prolapse, and 9 (6%) had cusp perforation. Repair methods included commissural plication (n = 154, 96%), partial cusp resection with plication (n = 47, 29%), resuspension or cusp shortening (n = 44, 28%), and closure of cusp perforation (n = 10, 6%).

RESULTS

There was 1 early death (0.6%). Two patients required re-repair of the aortic valve during initial hospitalization. During a mean follow-up of 4.2 years, there were 16 late deaths. Overall, 16 of 159 hospital survivors had late reoperation on the aortic valve (mean interval 2.8 years) without early mortality. Risks of reoperation on the aortic valve were 9%, 11%, and 15% at 3, 5, and 7 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Aortic valve repair can be performed with low risk and excellent freedom from valve-related morbidity and mortality. Late recurrence of aortic valve regurgitation led to reoperation in 8.8% of patients, but mortality associated with subsequent procedures is low. Aortic valve repair appears to be a good option for selected patients, particularly young patients who wish to avoid chronic anticoagulation with warfarin.

Medtronic Intact porcine bioprosthesis experience to twelve years

BACKGROUND

The Medtronic Intact porcine bioprosthesis was further evaluated to determine the influence of zero-pressure glutaraldehyde fixation on structural valve deterioration (SVD).

METHODS

From 1986 through 1996, at three Canadian centers, 1,272 patients had 1,296 procedures: 836 aortic valve replacement (AVR), 332 mitral valve replacement (MVR), 14 tricuspid valve replacement, 3 pulmonary valve replacement, and 111 multiple valve replacements. The mean age of the patient population was 67 years (range 9 to 91 years). The total follow-up was 8,011 patient-years (mean 6.2 years).

RESULTS

The late mortality (overall) was 4.8% and 6.7% per patient-year for AVR with or without concomitant procedures, respectively; and 4.7% and 10.4% per patient-year for MVR, respectively. There were 51 cases of SVD (AVR 22 of 836; MVR 23 of 332; pulmonary valve replacement 1 of 3; and multiple valve replacement 5 of 111). The actuarial freedom from SVD at 12 years for AVR was 94.3%+/-3.3% for patients aged 61 to 70 years and 97.7%+/-1.1% for those more than 70 years; for MVR actuarial freedom from SVD at 12 years was 93.7%+/-3.9% for patients more than 70 years. The actual freedom at 12 years from SVD for AVR was 92.4%+/-3.1% for patients aged 51 to 60 years, 96.1%+/-2.1% for those 61 to 70 years, and 98.4%+/-0.7% for those older than 70 years; for MVR actual freedom from SVD at 12 years was 89.6%+/-3.2% for patients 61 to 70 years and 96.6%+/-3.4% for those more than 70 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The Medtronic Intact porcine bioprosthesis, formulated with tissue preservation at zero-pressure fixation, has encouraging freedom from structural failure.

Prognosis after aortic valve replacement with a bioprosthesis: predictions based on meta-analysis and microsimulation

BACKGROUND

Bioprostheses are widely used as an aortic valve substitute, but knowledge about prognosis is still incomplete. The purpose of this study was to provide insight into the age-related life expectancy and actual risks of reoperation and valve-related events of patients after aortic valve replacement with a porcine bioprosthesis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a meta-analysis of 9 selected reports on stented porcine bioprostheses, including 5837 patients with a total follow-up of 31 874 patient-years. The annual rates of valve thrombosis, thromboembolism, hemorrhage, and nonstructural dysfunction were 0.03%, 0.87%, 0.38%, and 0.38%, respectively. The annual rate of endocarditis was estimated at 0.68% for >6 months of implantation and was 5 times as high during the first 6 months. Structural valve deterioration was described with a Weibull model that incorporated lower risks for older patients. These estimates were used to parameterize, calibrate, and validate a mathematical microsimulation model. The model was used to predict life expectancy and actual risks of reoperation and valve-related events after implantation for patients of different ages. For a 65-year-old male, these figures were 11.3 years, 28%, and 47%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of meta-analysis with microsimulation enabled a detailed insight into the prognosis after aortic valve replacement with a bioprosthesis for patients of different ages. This information will be useful for patient counseling and clinical decision making. It also could serve as a baseline for the evaluation of newer valve types.

Are the indications for tissue valves different in 2001 and how do we communicate these changes to our cardiology colleagues?

The indications for tissue valves in the aortic and mitral positions are becoming better defined with advances in valve design, valve preservation, and management of reoperations. Although some patients who require cardiac valve replacement clearly benefit more from one type of valve than from another, not infrequently one encounters a patient who is in the "gray zone," where the optimal choice is difficult. At present, bioprostheses for the diseased aortic valve include stented porcine and pericardial valves, stentless porcine valves, aortic homograft, and pulmonary autograft. For patients with mitral valve disease, options for tissue valve replacement are a stented porcine or pericardial prosthesis. Generally, factors to consider in choosing the appropriate valve substitute include the patient's age, expected life expectancy, coexisting medical problems, lifestyle, and socioeconomics; the etiology of the valve disease, annular size, and physician and patient preference are also relevant. Despite the known finite durability of tissue valves, which is the main limitation in their use, the long-term results have been satisfactory, particularly in older patients, patients with a limited life expectancy, and those undergoing valve replacement in the aortic position. Distillation of available information and ongoing communication between the surgeon and the cardiologist will enable us to assist the patient in choosing the best valve substitute.

Late results of heart valve replacement with the Hancock II bioprosthesis

OBJECTIVE

To review the late clinical outcomes of patients who had isolated aortic or mitral valve replacement with the Hancock II bioprosthesis.

METHODS

From 1982 to 1994, 670 patients underwent isolated aortic valve replacement and 310 underwent isolated mitral valve replacement with the Hancock II bioprosthesis (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn). Mean age was 65 +/- 12 years in both groups. Most patients were in New York Heart Association functional classes III or IV, and concomitant coronary artery disease was present in 44% of patients in the aortic valve group and 41% of patients in the mitral valve group. Patients were followed up prospectively at periodic intervals. Mean follow-up was 87 +/- 45 months in the aortic valve group and 83 +/- 50 months in the mitral valve group, and it was 99% complete.

RESULTS

Actuarial survival at 15 years was 47% +/- 3% in the aortic valve group and 30% +/- 5% in the mitral valve group. Older age, advanced functional class, impaired left ventricular function, active endocarditis, and coronary artery disease were independent predictors of late death. The freedom from thromboembolic complications at 15 years was 83% +/- 3% in the aortic and 87% +/- 3% in the mitral valve group. The freedom from infective endocarditis at 15 years was 96% +/- 1% in the aortic and 91% +/- 1% in the mitral valve group. At 15 years, the actuarial and actual freedom from structural valve deterioration was 81% +/- 5% and 90% +/- 3%, respectively, in the aortic group and 66% +/- 6% and 83% +/- 3%, respectively, in the mitral group. Younger age, mitral valve position, and poor ventricular function were independent predictors of structural valve deterioration. The freedom from repeat valve replacement at 15 years was 77% +/- 5% in the aortic group and 69% +/- 6% in the mitral. The vast majority of patients had functional improvement after valve replacement.

CONCLUSIONS

The Hancock II bioprosthesis has provided good clinical outcomes and is a durable valve, particularly in the aortic position in older patients.

Aortic root replacement with the freestyle stentless porcine aortic root bioprosthesis

BACKGROUND

Stentless porcine prosthetic valves offer several advantages over traditional valves. Among these are superior hemodynamics, laminar flow patterns, lack of need for anticoagulation and perhaps improved durability.

METHODS

One hundred and twelve patients were operated on from September 17, 1992 to April 13, 1998 as part of a multi-center worldwide investigation. All patients received a total aortic root replacement. Patients were evaluated postoperatively at discharge, 3 to 6 months, and yearly by clinical exam and color flow Doppler echocardiography.

RESULTS

There were 4 deaths either in the hospital or within 30 days after surgery for an operative mortality of 3.6%. No patients experienced structural valve deterioration, non-structural valve deterioration, paravalvular leak, unacceptable hemodynamic performance, or postoperative endocarditis. The linearized rates for survival and thromboembolic complications at 5 years were 82.8% and 90.5% respectively. Excellent hemodynamic function is demonstrated by very low gradients, large EOA, and an exceedingly low incidence of any aortic regurgitation.

CONCLUSIONS

The Medtronic Freestyle aortic root bioprosthesis can be used safely to replace the aortic root for aortic valve and aortic root pathology. Root replacement allows optimal hemodynamic performance with no significant aortic regurgitation. Early and intermediate results are encouraging, but further follow-up is needed to determine valve durability.

The impact of age, coronary artery disease, and cardiac comorbidity on late survival after bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to determine the effects of age, coronary artery disease and other cardiac comorbidities on late outcome following bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected on 670 patients undergoing aortic valve replacement with the Hancock II bioprosthesis (Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis, Minn) between 1982 and 1994. Mean patient age was 65 +/- 12 years (median, 68 years; range, 18-86 years). Follow-up was 99.7% complete at 69 +/- 40 months (median, 66 months; range, 0. 1-168 months). Survival and freedom from reoperation were evaluated univariately by Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariably by Cox regression.

RESULTS

After adjustment for gender, Cox regression analysis revealed that age of 65 years or older, left ventricular dysfunction, the presence of coronary artery disease, and advanced New York Heart Association functional classification were associated with a higher risk of late death. At 12 years, survival was significantly different by Kaplan-Meier analysis for both age younger than 65 years (71% +/- 4%) versus age 65 years or older (36% +/- 7%; P <.0001), left ventricular function grades 3 and 4 (26% +/- 13%) versus grades 1 and 2 (59% +/- 4%; P <.0001), no coronary artery disease (65% +/- 4%) versus coronary artery disease (35% +/- 8%; P <.0001), and functional class IV (33% +/- 9%) versus classes I to III (62% +/- 4%; P <.0001). Only 9 patients experienced primary tissue failure, all of whom were younger than 65 years of age. At 12 years, the freedom from primary tissue failure was 84% +/- 4% for those patients younger than 65 years of age, and 100% for those 65 years of age or older (P =.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term survival after aortic valve replacement is highly dependent on age, coronary artery disease, functional class, and left ventricular function, although bioprosthetic durability is dependent almost solely on age. Due to increased valve durability in patients who are 65 years of age or older, the Hancock II bioprosthesis may be an ideal aortic valve substitute in this age group. In patients who are younger than 65 years of age with advanced functional class, impaired left ventricular function, and coronary artery disease, this valve may also be used with a low probability of primary tissue failure. Patients without additional cardiac comorbidity may outlive their bioprosthetic valve, leading to reoperation.

Carpentier-Edwards standard and supraannular porcine bioprostheses: comparison of technology

BACKGROUND

Performance with regard to structural valve deterioration (SVD) with the Carpentier-Edwards standard (CE-S) and supraannular (CE-SAV) (Baxter Healthcare Corp, Irvine, CA) porcine bioprostheses was evaluated to determine whether progress in reduction of structural failure has been achieved with technological changes.

METHODS

The CE-S was implanted during 567 aortic valve replacement (AVR) and 486 mitral valve replacement (MVR) procedures, and the CE-SAV was implanted during 1,670 AVR and 1,096 MVR procedures. The failure mode of early stent dehiscence with the CE-SAV prosthesis, thought to be controlled by manufacturing changes in 1986 and 1987, supported comparison of the CE-SAV with censored cases of stent dehiscence. Stent dehiscence accounted for only 1.2% (1 of 81) and 14.1% (29 of 205) of AVR and MVR CE-SAV failures, respectively.

RESULTS

The only difference for AVR for freedom from SVD occurred in the 21- to 40-year age group at 15 years and was 68% for the CE-SAV and 31% for the CE-S (p<0.05). In the 61- to 70-year age group, freedom from SVD at 15 years was 76% for the CE-S and 84% for the CE-SAV; for the 71-year or higher age group, freedom from SVD was 89% and 95%, respectively (p = NS). For MVR freedom from SVD was different only in the 71-year or higher age group and was 90% for the CE-S and 59% for the CE-SAV (p<0.05). Freedom from SVD was reduced but was similar (p = NS) for the other age groups. For AVR the actual freedom from SVD at 15 years for the CE-S and CE-SAV was, respectively, 79% and 72% for the 51- to 60-year age group, 86% and 91% for the 61- to 70-year age group, and 98% and 98% for the 71-year or higher age group. For MVR, these rates were, respectively, 69% and 75% for the 61- to 70-year age group and 96% and 89% for the 71-year and higher age group.

CONCLUSIONS

The technologic advancements made in the second-generation CE-SAV bioprosthesis to reduce the incidence of structural failure have not uniformly been successful. The actual freedom from SVD provides evidence for implantation of porcine bioprostheses for AVR in age groups 61 to 70 years and 71 years or higher and for MVR in the age group 71 years or higher.

Reoperation on stentless aortic xenografts

BACKGROUND

Stentless xenografts have been proposed as substitutes for the diseased aortic valve. Cases of valve failure requiring reoperation have thus far been sporadic. To establish the prevalence and outcome of reoperation on stentless aortic xenograft valves, all patients operated on between October 1992 and October 1996 were reviewed.

METHODS

One hundred ninety-nine patients, 94 men and 105 women aged 70+/-7 years, had stentless aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis (in 139), insufficiency (19), or both (38). Three prostheses were used, including the Biocor PSB (Belo Horizonte, Brazil) (106), Toronto SPV (St. Jude Medical, Inc., St. Paul, MN) (52), and O'Brien-Angell (Cryolife, Atlanta, GA) (41). While the Biocor PSB and Toronto SPV prostheses are designed to be implanted freehand with inflow and outflow suture lines, the O'Brien-Angell valve requires a single suture line.

RESULTS

There were 7 (3.5%) total and 6 (3%) valve-related reoperative procedures during a follow-up extending up to 4 years (mean 26+/-20 months). All but one valve-related reoperation, due to endocarditis 36 months after implant, were early (less than 12 months after initial operation). Prevalence of valve-related reinterventions was 1%, 0%, and 12%, and freedom from reoperation at 3 years was 98%+/-2%, 100%, and 81%+/-8%, in patients receiving the Biocor PSB, Toronto SPV, and O'Brien-Angell valves, respectively (p = 0.0039). Cause of reoperation was technical in 3 (O'Brien-Angell), pannus in-growth in 1 (O'Brien-Angell), valve tear in 1 (O'Brien-Angell), and endocarditis in 1 (Biocor PSB). All patients survived replacement of the xenograft with a stented bioprosthesis (5) or homograft root (1) and were discharged after a mean hospital stay of 6+/-3 days (range, 4 to 12 days). At follow-up 15+/-8 months after reintervention (range, 6 to 34 months), all patients are symptom-free with no evidence of recurrent valve obstruction, regurgitation, or infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Reoperation for stentless xenograft failure is a rare overall event. Implant of the O'Brien-Angell valve may be associated with a higher prevalence of early reintervention because of nonstructural failure. When needed, reoperation on a stentless xenograft is generally a simple procedure and carries a low surgical risk.

The medtronic intact porcine valve: ten-year clinical review

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to assess the long-term mortality and morbidity associated with the Medtronic Intact valve (Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis, Minn).

METHOD

Between 1983 and 1996, 447 patients (280 men and 167 women) received 466 Intact valves: 280 aortic, 156 mitral, and 30 tricuspid. The mean age was 57 years (median 63 years), with 45% younger than 60 years. The mean New York Heart Association class was 3.1. The follow-up was 98% complete and extended for 39 months (1-154 months) and 1324 patient-years. There were 32 valves at risk at 10 years after implantation. Doppler echocardiography was performed whenever possible in patients followed up for longer than 4 years (mean 8 years) after implantation.

RESULTS

Ten-year overall actuarial survival was 30% +/- 6% (14% +/- 7% for New York Heart Association classes IV-V and 39% +/- 8% for classes I-III). At 10 years freedom from infective endocarditis was 92% +/- 3%, freedom from thromboembolism was 80% +/- 5%, and freedom from nonstructural valve deterioration was 95% +/- 2%. Ten-year freedom from explantation was 64% +/- 6%, freedom from valve-related events was 51% +/- 6%, and freedom from valve-related death was 88% +/- 3%. There were 26 examples of structural valve deterioration, mainly caused by leaflet calcification (in 17 cases) and by buttress detachment (in 6 cases). In the aortic position at 10 years freedom from structural valve deterioration was 81% +/- 9%, but with only 1 event in patients older than 40 years (freedom 92% +/- 8%) and 100% freedom in patients older than 60 years. There was also 100% freedom from structural valve deterioration in the tricuspid position. In the mitral position freedom was 65% +/- 8%, with no significant difference between age groups.

CONCLUSION

The Intact valve provides superior results in the aortic position in patients older than 40 years and in the tricuspid position at all ages.

The Hancock II bioprosthesis at 12 years

BACKGROUND

The Hancock II bioprosthesis has been used for heart valve replacement since 1982 in our institution. We previously reported its clinical performance at 8 years and at 10 years. This is a progress report on its performance at 12 years.

METHODS

From 1982 to 1994 the Hancock II bioprosthesis was used for aortic valve replacement (AVR) in 723 patients and for mitral valve replacement (MVR) in 328 patients. The mean age of the patients was 65 years for both groups. Coronary artery disease was present in 42% of patients who had AVR and 45% of patients who had MVR. Patients have been followed up prospectively at annual intervals; the mean follow-up was 68+/-40 months for AVR and 66+/-43 months for MVR; it was 99% complete.

RESULTS

There were 36 (5%) operative and 159 late deaths in the AVR group, and 26 (8%) operative and 92 late deaths in the MVR. The actuarial survival at 12 years was 54%+/-4% for AVR and 42%+/-5% for MVR. Age greater than 65 years and coronary artery disease had a profound effect on late survival. At 12 years the freedom from thromboembolism was 86%+/-2% for AVR and 90% +/-2% for MVR; from endocarditis, 95%+/-1% for both groups; from primary tissue failure, 94%+/-2% for AVR and 82%+/-5% for MVR; and from valve reoperation, 89% +/-3% for AVR and 78%+/-5% for MVR. There was no primary tissue failure at 12 years in patients older than 65 years who had AVR.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical performance of the Hancock II has been very satisfactory and this bioprosthesis appears to be more durable than its predecessors.

Medtronic intact porcine bioprosthesis: 10 years' experience

BACKGROUND

The Medtronic Intact porcine bioprosthesis experience was evaluated over a period of 10 years to determine the influence of structural valve deterioration by valve position in various age groupings.

METHODS

From 1986 to 1996 inclusive, at three centers, 1,272 patients had the prosthesis implanted in 1,296 procedures. The mean age of the population was 67 years (range, 9 to 91 years). There were 836 aortic valve replacements (AVR) (64.5%), 333 mitral valve replacements (MVR) (25.7%), and 110 multiple valve replacements (MR) (8.5%).

RESULTS

The early mortality was 7.3% (94 of 1,296 procedures). The early mortality with concomitant procedures (primarily coronary artery bypass grafting) was 9.8% (52 of 528) and without, 5.5% (42 of 768). The late mortality was 4.25%/patient-year. The linearized rate of major thromboembolism was 0.86%/patient-year. The rate of reoperation was 1.19%/patient-year and valve-related mortality, 1.06%/patient-year. There were 36 cases of structural valve deterioration for aortic valve replacement (16), mitral valve replacement (15), tricuspid valve replacement (2), and multiple valve replacement (3). The freedom from structural valve deterioration for aortic valve replacement was in patients 21 to 40 years, 62.5%+/-25.8% at 7 years; 41 to 50 years, 75.0%+/-15.3% at 7 years; 51 to 60 years, 91.0%+/-4.5% at 8 years; 61 to 70 years, 98.7%+/-0.7% at 10 years; and older than 70 years, 98.3%+/-1.0% at 10 years (p < 0.05). The freedom from structural valve deterioration for mitral valve replacement was for patients 41 to 50 years, 91.7%+/-8.0% at 7 years; 51 to 60 years, 85.9%+/-9.9% at 8 years; 61 to 70 years, 86.3%+/-6.8% at 8 years; and older than 70 years, 93.9%+/-4.8% at 8 years (not significant).

CONCLUSIONS

The Medtronic Intact porcine bioprosthesis has acceptable freedom from structural valve deterioration in both the aortic and mitral positions approaching 10 years of evaluation.

Carpentier-Edwards supraannular porcine bioprosthesis evaluation over 15 years

BACKGROUND

The Carpentier-Edwards supraannular porcine bioprosthesis experience during 15 years has been evaluated to determine the incidence of structural valve deterioration by valve position in various age groupings.

METHODS

From 1981 to 1995, 2,943 patients older than 20 years had the prosthesis implanted in 3,024 procedures. The mean age of the population was 65.5+/-11.9 years (range, 21 to 89 years). Aortic valve replacement was performed in 1,657 patients (54.8%); mitral valve replacement, 1,092 (36.1%); multiple valve replacement, 253 (8.3%); pulmonary valve replacement, 2 (0.1%); and tricuspid valve replacement, 20 (0.7%). Concomitant procedures were performed in 1,332 patients (45.3%), and 352 (12.0%) had previous procedures.

RESULTS

The early mortality was 8.9% (270), only 0.4% (11) valve-related. The total follow-up was 17,471 years (mean, 5.9+/-4.1 years). The late mortality was 5.2%/ patient-year (901) with the valve-related component 1.0%/patient-year (171). The reoperation rate was 2.1%/ patient-year (369) with 4.3% mortality (16). The linearized rate of structural valve deterioration was 2.0%/patient-year (341), and overall complications, 5.9%/patient-year (1,019). The overall survival, at 15 years, was 31.1%+/2.8% (p < 0.05; aortic valve replacement greater than mitral valve replacement or multiple valve replacement). The freedom from structural valve deterioration for aortic valve replacement was, at 12 years, for patients older than 70 years, 95.3%+/-2.7%; 61 to 70 years, 92.9%+/-2.1%; 51 to 60 years, 70.1%+/-5.3%; 41 to 50 years, 60.0%+/-8.8%; and 21 to 40 years, 75.7%+/-7.3%. The freedom from structural valve deterioration for mitral valve replacement was, at 12 years, for patients older than 70 years, 66.1%+/-9.7%; 61 to 70 years, 53.1%+/-4.7%; 51 to 60 years, 52.6%+/-5.5%; 41 to 50 years, 39.3%+/-6.9%; and 21 to 40 years, 42.1%+/-9.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

The prosthesis is recommended for aortic valve replacement for patients older than 70 years and for patients 61 to 70 years (when extended longevity is not anticipated) and for mitral valve replacement for patients older than 70 years (when extended longevity is not anticipated).

Aortic valve replacement with stentless and stented porcine valves: a case-match study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the potential benefits of the hemodynamic superiority of stentless valves, we conducted a case-match study among patients who underwent aortic valve replacement with two types of porcine bioprostheses: the Toronto SPV and the stented Hancock II bioprosthesis.

METHODS

Preoperative clinical variables predictive of death after aortic valve replacement were determined by a stepwise logistic regression analysis in a series of 908 consecutive patients who received porcine aortic bioprostheses during a 14-year interval. Advanced age, New York Heart Association functional class IV, left ventricular ejection fraction of less than 30%, and coronary artery disease were independent predictors of death. On the basis of these four variables, 198 pairs of patients who survived aortic valve replacement with stentless and stented porcine valves were matched. The follow-up, truncated to the shortest interval for each matched pair, was 43 +/- 24 months for both groups.

RESULTS

At 8 years the actuarial survival was 91% +/- 4% for the Toronto SPV group and 69% +/- 8% for the Hancock II group (p = 0.006); the freedom from cardiac-related death was 95% +/- 4% for the Toronto SPV and 81% +/- 8% for the Hancock II (p = 0.01); the freedom from any valve-related complication was 81% +/- 5% for the Toronto SPV and 50% +/- 10% for the Hancock II (p = 0.008). A Cox proportional hazard model demonstrated a significant reduction in cardiac mortality rates and valve-related morbidity in patients who received the Toronto SPV bioprosthesis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although it is possible that confounding factors may have played a role in the clinical outcomes of this case-control study, the study suggests that aortic valve replacement with a stentless porcine valve enhances survival. This is believed to be due to the hemodynamic superiority of these valves.

Choosing a prosthetic heart valve

Although most of the available prosthetic heart valves function remarkably well, the variety of available choices attests to the inability of any single one to fulfill the requirements of the ideal valve substitute. The mechanical prostheses include the caged-ball, tilting-disc, and bileaflet valves. Tissue valves available in the United States are the Carpentier-Edwards and Hancock porcine heterograft valves and the Carpentier-Edwards pericardial valve. Review of several large comparative studies on valve performance reveals that the overall results with tissue and mechanical valves are about equal at the end of 10 years. The characteristics of each type of valve substitute dictate the selection of one prosthesis in preference to others for a particular patient. Mechanical prostheses are recommended for patients without contraindications for anticoagulants. Tissue valves are reserved for patients over 65 years of age or for patients in whom anticoagulation is contraindicated. Multiple other patient-related factors need to be considered in selecting the appropriate valve, including the psychosocial situation and patient preference.

Midterm results after aortic valve replacement with freehand stentless xenografts: a comparison of three prostheses

OBJECTIVE

The ideal substitute for the diseased aortic valve is yet to be found. For the assessment and comparison of the midterm results after aortic valve replacement with three different types of freehand stentless xenografts, all patients who underwent the operation between October 1992 and April 1997 were reviewed.

METHODS

Of 231 patients undergoing aortic valve replacement, 106 patients (group 1) were given the Biocor PSB (Biocor Industria e Pesquisa Ltda, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil); 76 patients (group 2) were given the Toronto SPV (St. Jude Medical, Inc., St. Paul, Minn.), and 49 patients (group 3) were given the O'Brien-Angell valve (Bravo Cardiovascular model 300, Cryolife, Inc., Marietta, Ga.). The first two xenografts require inflow and outflow suturelines; the third xenograft needs a single-sutureline implantation. Mean age (70 +/- 6 years; 70 +/- 7 years; 72 +/- 9 years; p = 0.6), prevalence of male sex (56 patients, 53%; 37 patients, 49%; 22 patients, 45%; p = 0.7), of aortic stenosis (72 patients, 68%; 54 patients, 71%; 37 patients, 73%; p = 0.6), and need for associated procedures (51 patients, 48%; 30 patients, 40%; 21 patients, 43%; p = 0.1) were comparable among groups. Mean aortic crossclamp time was shorter in group 3 (96 +/- 24 minutes; 100 +/- 23 minutes; 88 +/- 25 minutes;p = 0.01).

RESULTS

Early deaths were 3 of 106 (3%) in group 1, 2 of 76 (3%) in group 2, and 2 of 49 (4%) in group 3. Follow-up of survivors ranged from 1 to 54 months (mean 32 +/- 13 months). Survival at 4 years was 90% +/- 3% in group 1, 95% +/- 3% in group 2, 85% +/- 8% in group 3 (p = 0.3). At 4 years, freedom from valve-related events was 95% +/- 6%, 100%, 70% +/- 8% (p = 0.004), while freedom from valve deterioration was 99% +/- 1%, 100%, 73% +/- 8% (p = 0.001), in group 1, 2, and 3, respectively (p = 0.001). At follow-up, reintervention on the xenograft was necessary in one patient (endocarditis) in group 1, none in group 2, and six in group 3 (technical cause, group 3; valve tear, group 2; pannus, group 1). Regression analysis showed O'Brien-Angell type of xenograft to be predictive of valve-related events (p = 0.02), valve deterioration (p = 0.001), and reoperation (p = 0.001) during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Midterm survival after stentless aortic valve replacement is good with all three xenografts. Freedom from valve-related events, valve deterioration, and reoperation are excellent with the Biocor PSB or the Toronto SPV stentless valves but less satisfactory with the O'Brien-Angell valve.