ObjectiveTo investigate the influence of mechanical and biological valves on clinical benefits of elderly patients with valvular heart disease.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 280 elderly patients with valvular heart disease treated by valve replacement between 2008 and 2014 year. The patients were divided into two groups by tendency score matching including a group A with biological valves and a group B with mechanical valves. Finally, there were 96 patients in each group. There were 43 males and 53 females at age of 64.41±6.52 years in the group A, 44 males and 52 females at age of 64.07±6.20 years in the group B.ResultsThe bleeding rate of skin and mucosa of the group B was significantly higher than that of the group A (P<0.05). There was no statistical difference in mortality within 30 days after operation, all-cause mortality, re-hospitalization rate, re-valve replacement rate, combined atrial flutter/atrial fibrillation ratio, drug use, incidence of cerebral infarction, cerebral hemorrhage, new peripheral vascular embolism and visceral hemorrhage, heart function (NYHA) classification, the cumulative survival rate of all the patients during follow-up (P=0.63), or the cumulative survival rate of the patients with no thrombus/hemorrhage (P=0.75) between the two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionMechanical valve replacement and bioprosthetic valve replacement in the treatment of valvular heart disease in the elderly can achieve similar clinical benefits and both have clinical application value.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of patients receiving mitral valve replacement with mechanical or biological prosthesis.MethodsThe clinical data of patients undergoing mitral valve replacement in our center between January 2005 and August 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with emergency, reoperation, bleeding or embolic events or incomplete clinical data were ruled out.ResultsTotally 569 patients were enrolled, including 325 with mechanical prosthesis (a mechanical prosthesis group, 111 males and 214 females with a mean age of 55.54±4.09 years) and 244 bioprosthesis (a bioprosthesis group, 90 males and 154 females with a mean age of 60.02±4.28 years). There was no significant difference in the in-hospital mortality between the two groups (P=0.250). The survival rate at postoperative 15 years of the bioprosthesis group was higher than that of mechanical prosthesis group (78.69% vs. 66.25%, χ2=8.844, P=0.003). No remarkable differences were found in prosthesis failure (P=0.183) and thromboembolism events (P=0.505) between the two groups. Bleeding occurred more frequently in the mechanical prosthesis group (P=0.040). After the propensity-score matched analysis based on the age, the survival rate was still higher in the bioprosthesis group than in the mechanical prosthesis group (P=0.032).ConclusionBiological prosthesis can be considered as the preferable choice in mitral valve replacement procedure in order to improve the long-term survival and decrease the frequent of bleeding events.
Commissural misalignment of biological valve and autologous valve during transcatheter aortic valve replacement may affect the filling of coronary artery, reduce the feasibility of redo-aortic valve intervention and damage the valve function, which will adversely affect long-term prognosis of patients. Some studies have obtained achievement by changing the axial direction of valve and using individualized computer simulation technology to improve the alignment technology. However, there are still many unknown problems about the impact of commissural misalignment on patients, and accurate commissural alignment techniques still need to be further explored. This article systematically expounds the possible impact of commissural misalignment between biological valve and autologous valve in transcatheter aortic valve replacement, possibly effective accurate commissural alignment techniques and related research progress.
Objective To summarize the short-term results of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) in the treatment of bioprosthetic valve failure after aortic valve replacement. Methods We reviewed the clinical data of patients who underwent ViV-TAVI from 2021 to 2022 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University. The valve function was evaluated by echocardiography before operation, immediately after operation and 3 months after operation. The all-cause death and main complications during hospitalization were analyzed. Results A total of 13 patients were enrolled, including 8 males and 5 females with a mean age of 65.9±8.5 years, and the interval time between aortic valve replacement and ViV-TAVI was 8.5±3.4 years. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality risk score was 10.3%±3.2%. None of the 13 patients had abnormal valve function after operation. The mean transvalvular differential pressure of aortic valve was decreased (P<0.001), the peak flow velocity of aortic valve was decreased (P<0.001), the left ventricular ejection fraction was not changed significantly (P=0.480). There were slight perivalvular leakage in 2 patient and slight valve regurgitation in 3 patients. Three months after operation, the mean transvalvular pressure difference and peak flow velocity of aortic valve in 12 patients were significantly different from those before operation (P≤0.001). Conclusion This study demonstrates that ViV-TAVI for the treatment of bioprosthetic valve failure after aortic valve replacement is associated with sustained clinical and functional cardiovascular benefits, the short-term results are satisfactory.
Along with the coming of aged society, the prevalence of heart valvular disease is significantly increasing, and the use of bioprosthetic valves for treating patients with severe valve disease has increased over the last two decades. As a consequence, a growing number of patients with surgical bioprosthesis degeneration is predicted in the near future. In this setting, valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic/mitral valve replacement (TAVR/TMVR) has emerged as an alternative to redo surgery. A deep knowledge of the mechanism and features of the failed bioprosthetic heart valve is pivotal to plan an adequate procedure. Multimodal imaging is fundamental in the diagnostic and pre-procedural phases. The immediate and mid-term clinical and hemodynamic results have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of ViV techniques, but the development of these techniques faces several specific challenges, such as coronary obstruction, potential post-procedural mismatch and leaflet thrombosis. This article reviews the current status and prospects of ViV-TAVR technology in the treatment for biological valve degeneration, and suggests that ViV-TAVR should be promoted and implemented in existing medical centers with good surgical aortic valve replacement experience, so as to provide better treatment for patients.