Bioprosthesis in the Mitral Position: Bovine Pericardial versus Porcine Xenograft

Bovine pericardial versus porcine bioprosthetic mitral valves: results from a Korean Nationwide Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

Comparisons of long-term clinical outcomes of mitral valve replacement (MVR) between bovine pericardial and porcine bioprostheses are conflicting, with limited research in large-scale real-world clinical settings. This study examined clinical outcomes in MVR according to bioprosthesis type using a national administrative claims database.

METHODS

This study included adult patients undergoing bioprosthetic MVR between 2003 and 2018 using administrative health care data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. Propensity score matching with competing risk analysis was used to compare the clinical outcomes according to the type of bioprosthesis. The end points were death, cardiac death, and valve-related events, including the incidence of reoperation, endocarditis, systemic thromboembolism, and major bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of 3151 patients underwent bioprosthetic MVR with bovine pericardial (n = 1628, 51.7%) or porcine (n = 1523, 48.3%) bioprostheses. After matching, 1170 pairs were included in the final analysis. During follow-up (median 4.49 years, interquartile range 1.87 -8.75 years), death occurred in 1178 patients (6.8%/patient-year), comprising 730 (4.3%/patient-year) cardiac death. No significant differences were noted between the bovine and porcine groups in the cumulative incidences of death from any cause [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 1.00; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.87-1.14], cardiac mortality (aHR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.81-1.14), or reoperation (aHR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.72-1.41).

CONCLUSIONS

This study on a nationwide comparison between bovine and porcine bioprostheses in MVR found no significant differences in clinical outcomes including mortality, and valve-related reoperation.