Background Limited literature exists that evaluated outcomes of kidney transplant-eligible patients who are having dialysis and who are undergoing valve replacement. Our main objective in this study was to compare mortality, reoperation, and bleeding episodes between bioprosthetic and mechanical valve procedures among kidney transplant-eligible patients who are having dialysis. Methods and Results We studied 887 and 1925 dialysis patients from the United States Renal Data System, who underwent mitral valve replacement and aortic valve replacement (AVR) after being waitlisted for a kidney transplant (2000-2015), respectively. Time to death, time to reoperation, and time to bleeding requiring hospitalizations were compared separately for AVR and mitral valve replacement. Kaplan-Meier survival curves, Cox proportional hazards model for time to death, accelerated time to event model for time to reoperation, and counting process model for time to recurrent bleeding were used. There were no differences in mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.77-1.09) or risk of reoperation or risk of significant bleeding events between bioprosthetic and mechanical mitral valve replacement. However, mechanical AVR was associated with a modestly significant less hazard of death (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.94) compared with bioprosthetic AVR. There were no differences in time to reoperation, or time to significant bleeding events between bioprosthetic and mechanical AVR. Conclusions For kidney transplant waitlisted patients who are on dialysis and who are undergoing surgical valve replacement, bioprosthetic and mechanical valves have comparable survival, reoperation rates, and bleeding episodes requiring hospitalizations at both mitral and aortic locations. These findings emphasize that an individualized informed decision is recommended when choosing the type of valve for this special group of patients having dialysis.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8174273PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.120.018971DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

valve replacement
24
patients dialysis
16
bioprosthetic mechanical
16
kidney transplant
12
mitral valve
12
time reoperation
12
model time
12
valve
10
time
9
mitral aortic
8

Similar Publications

Background: The prognostic implications of cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) in patients who undergo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have not been fully elucidated. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the association between the presence of CMBs and adverse outcomes post-TAVR.

Methods: In this single-center retrospective study, we included 124 patients who underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging before TAVR.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Nasal Valve Considerations in Mohs Reconstruction.

Otolaryngol Clin North Am

January 2025

Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, 450 Clarkson Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11201, USA. Electronic address:

Airway obstruction is a possible sequela following reconstruction of the nose after Mohs excision of skin cancers. While the principles and goals of tissue replacement after Mohs micrographic surgery are well-established, less attention has been paid to the evaluation of the nasal airway after reconstruction. Reconstructive planning begins with understanding the risk factors associated with the development of nasal valve compromise.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objectives: Treatment decisions for severe aortic stenosis (AS) are complex, since there are two active and comparable options: transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement. The disease predominantly affects older individuals, who are frequently comorbid with from cognitive impairment. This study aimed to establish a screening-triggered system to assess the decision-making capacity of patients with AS, support their decision-making, and facilitate referrals to specialists when necessary.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Valvular heart disease (VHD) poses a significant threat to human health, and the transcatheter heart valve replacement (THVR) is the best treatment for severe VHD. Currently, the glutaraldehyde cross-linked commercial bioprosthetic heart valves (BHVs) remain the first choice for THVR. However, the cross-linking by glutaraldehyde exhibits several drawbacks, including calcification, inflammatory reactions, and difficult endothelialization, which limits the longevity and applicability of BHVs.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

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!