CarboMedics Mitroflow Pericardial Aortic Bioprosthesis - Performance in Patients Aged 60 Years and Older after 15 Years

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to carry out a current assessment of the Mitroflow pericardial bioprosthesis (model 11) according to the durability of the prosthesis after 15 years in patients aged 60 years or older. Methods: This bioprosthesis was implanted in 161 patients (mean age 69.5 ± 6.3 years; range 60 - 94 years) undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) between 1982 and 1992. There were 84 patients aged 60 - 69 years (mean 64.5 ± 3.1years) and 77 patients aged 70 years or older (mean 74.8 ± 4.3 years). Of the total population, concomitant procedures were performed in 63 patients (39.1 %); of these, coronary artery bypass grafting was performed in 39 (24.2 %). Results: Early mortality was 4.8 % (4 patients) in the 60 - 69 year age group and 10.4 % (8) in patients aged 70 years or older (p = 0.290). Late mortality was 4.5 %/patient-year (35) for those aged 60 - 69 years and 8.1 %/patient-year (49) for those aged 70 years or older (p = 0.007). Patient survival at 15 years of patients aged 60 - 69 years was 47.6 ± 6.3 % and of patients aged 70 years or older was 20.9 ± 5.4 % (p = 0.003) ([Fig. 1]). Freedom from valve-related mortality for patients in the 60 - 69 year age group was 92.1 ± 3.5 % at 15 years (0.6 %/patient-year [5]), and in the patient group aged 70 years or older it was 84.4 ± 5.3 % (1.3 %/patient-year [8]; p = 0.194). Freedom from reoperation for patients in the 60 - 69 year age group was 73.9 ± 5.0 % (2.6 %/patient-year [20]), and for patients aged 70 years or older it was 91.4 ± 3.4 % (1.0 %/patient-year [6]; p = 0.029). The structural valve deterioration (SVD) rate for patients in the 60 - 69 year age group was 2.4 %/patient-year (19), and for patients aged 70 years or older it was 1.0 %/patient-year (6) (p = 0.041). Actuarial freedom from structural valve deterioration at 15 years for patients aged 60 - 69 years was 62.0 ± 7.3 %, and 80.8 ± 7.9 % for patients aged 70 years and older (p = 0.049) (actual freedom 73.9 ± 5.2 % and 91.4 ± 3.4 %, respectively). Conclusions: The Mitroflow pericardial bioprosthesis can still be recommended for aortic valve replacement in patients 70 years and older.

heart valve surgery - aortic disease - cardiovascular surgery - heart disease

References

• 1 Ionescu M I, Tandon A P, Mary D AS, Abid A. Heart valve replacement with Ionescu-Shiley pericardial xenograft.  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1977;  73 31-42
• 2 Jamieson W RE, Janusz M T, MacNab J, Henderson C. Hemodynamic comparison of second- and third generation stented bioprostheses in aortic valve replacement.  Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;  71 (Suppl 5) S282-S284
• 3 Franzen S, Nylander E, Olin C. Aortic valve replacement with pericardial valves in patients with small aortic roots. Clinical results in a consecutive series of patients receiving 19 and 21 mm prostheses.  Scand Cardiovasc J. 2001;  35 114-118
• 4 Pomar J L, Jamieson W RE, Pelletier L C, Gerein A N, Castella M, Brownlee R T. Mitroflow pericardial bioprosthesis: clinical performance to ten years.  Ann Thorac Surg. 1995;  60 S305-S310
• 5 Mazzucotelli J P, Bertrand P C, Loisance D Y. The Mitroflow pericardial valve: clinical performance to ten years.  J Heart Valve Dis. 1995;  4 407-413
• 6 Minami K, Schereika S, Kortke H, Gleichmann U, Korfer R. Long term follow up of Mitroflow pericardial valve bioprosthesis in the small aortic annulus.  J Cardiovasc Surg. 1993;  34 189-193
• 7 Pomar J L, Jamieson W RE, Pelletier L, Castella M, Germann E, Brownlee R T. Mitroflow pericardial bioprosthesis experience in aortic valve replacement ≥ 60 years of age.  Ann Thorac Surg. 1998;  66 S53-S56
• 8 Edmunds L H, Richard E, Lawrence H, Gary L, Miller D C, Richard D. Guidelines for reporting morbidity and mortality after cardiac valvular operations.  Ann Thorac Surg. 1996;  62 932-935
• 9 Yankah C, Schubel J, Buz S, Siniawski H, Hetzer R. Seventeen year clinical results of 1037 Mitroflow pericardial heart valve prostheses in the aortic position.  J Heart Valve Dis. 2005;  14 172-180
• 10 Thulin L I, Thielen U J, Kymie K AF. Mitroflow pericardial bioprosthesis in the aortic position. Low incidence of structural valve deterioration in elderly patients during a 11-year follow-up.  Scand Cardiovasc J. 2000;  34 192-196
• 11 Minami K, Zittermann A, Schulte-Eistrup S, Koertke H, Korfer R. Mitroflow synergy prostheses for aortic valve replacement: 19 years experience with 1516 patients.  Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;  80 1699-1705
• 12 Minami K, Boethig D, Mirow N, Kleikamp G, Koertke H, Godehardt E, Koerfer R. Mitroflow pericardial valve prosthesis in the aortic position: an analysis of long-term outcome and prognostic factors.  J Heart Valve Dis. 2000;  9 112-122
• 13 Jamieson W RE, Burr L H, Miyagishima R T, Germann E. et al . Carpentier-Edwards supra-annular porcine bioprosthesis: clinical performance over 20 years.  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;  130 994-1000
• 14 Gonzalez J, Garcia B, Garcia A, Vega Fernandez M, Amaro Cendon A, Varela Roman A, Gil de la Pena M. The influence of the design on the medium to long-term hemodynamic behavior of 19 mm pericardial aortic valve prostheses.  J Heart Valve Dis. 1996;  5 (Suppl 3) S317-S323
• 15 Gonzalez J, Garcia B, Garcia A, Vega Fernandez M, Amaro Cendon A, Castelo Fuentes V, Garcia-Bengoechea J B, Gil de la Pena M. Hemodynamics of various designs of 19 mm pericardial aortic valve bioprosthesis.  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1996;  10 201-206
• 16 Jamieson W RE, Germann E, Aupart M R, Neville P H, Marchand M A, Fradet G J. 15-year comparison of supra-annular porcine and perimount aortic bioprostheses.  Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Annals. 2006;  14 200-205
• 17 Yankah C, Minami K, Zittermann A, Stein J, Koertke H, Siniawski H, Koerfer R, Hetzer R. Two institutional clinical results of Mitroflow pericardial aortic bioprostheses in 3029 patients: Twenty-year experience (including personal communication). Society for Heart Valve Disease. 2007 presentation