Objective: To investigate the influence of choice of prosthesis (bioprosthetic valves or mechanical valves) on intermediate-term outcomes in patients on hemodialysis undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR).

Methods: A multi-institutional retrospective cohort study was conducted in 18 Japanese centers. All adult patients on chronic hemodialysis who underwent AVR from 2008 and 2015 were included (n = 491). The early and late results were compared between groups. The hazard ratios were calculated using Cox regression and Fine-Gray models with adjustment for propensity score based on 41 confounders. The mean follow-up period was 2.5 ± 2.1 years (up to 8.3 years) with 98% completeness.

Results: There were 323 patients who received a bioprosthetic valve (group B), and 168 patients who received a mechanical valve (group M). There was no significant difference for in-hospital death rate between groups (group B: 12.1%; group M: 8.9%; P = .29). The overall survival rate at 5 years after surgery was 39.3% in group B and 50.4% in group M (P = .42). Freedom from reoperation at 5 years was 97.1% in group B and 97.8% in group M (P = .88). On propensity-score adjusted analyses, there were no significant differences in overall survival between groups.

Conclusions: There were no significant differences in overall survival between bioprosthetic valves and mechanical valves in patients on hemodialysis undergoing AVR.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.08.104DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

mechanical valves
12
patients hemodialysis
12
intermediate-term outcomes
8
aortic valve
8
valve replacement
8
valves patients
8
bioprosthetic valves
8
valves mechanical
8
hemodialysis undergoing
8
patients received
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!