Hong Rae Kim MD , Ho Jin Kim MD , Seonok Kim MD , Yejee Kim MD , Jung-Min Ahn MD , Joon Bum Kim MD , Dae-Hee Kim MD
{"title":"Bovine pericardial versus porcine bioprosthetic aortic valves: A nationwide population-based cohort study in Korea","authors":"Hong Rae Kim MD , Ho Jin Kim MD , Seonok Kim MD , Yejee Kim MD , Jung-Min Ahn MD , Joon Bum Kim MD , Dae-Hee Kim MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jtcvs.2023.10.060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To compare the clinical outcomes of aortic valve replacement (AVR) using bovine pericardial and porcine bioprostheses, utilizing a nationwide administrative claims database.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Adult patients (age ≥40 years) who underwent bioprosthetic AVR, without other valve replacements, between 2003 and 2018 were identified from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. The outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and valve-related events, including the incidence of reoperation<span><span><span>, endocarditis, systemic </span>thromboembolism<span>, and major bleeding. Baseline adjustment was performed using </span></span>propensity score matching. Time-related outcomes were evaluated using a competing risk analysis, with death as a competing risk.</span></div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Among the 7714 patients who underwent bioprosthetic AVR, 5621 (72.9%) received bovine pericardial prostheses and 2093 (27.1%) received porcine bioprostheses. After matching, 1937 pairs were included in the final analysis. During follow-up (median, 4.49 years; interquartile range, 2.83-8.20 years), the use of porcine bioprostheses was associated with a higher risk of aortic valve<span> reoperation (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16 to 3.01); however, no significant differences were observed in cumulative incidences of all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, thromboembolism, or major bleeding. Subgroup analyses revealed that the use of bovine valves was associated with improved survival in patients with diabetes mellitus, whereas in patients undergoing dialysis, porcine valves exhibited better survival than bovine valves.</span></div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In this large nationwide cohort study of patients undergoing bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement, the use of porcine prostheses was significantly associated with an increased risk of reoperation compared with the use of bovine prostheses, supporting previous findings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","volume":"168 5","pages":"Pages 1438-1447.e4"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022522323010176","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective
To compare the clinical outcomes of aortic valve replacement (AVR) using bovine pericardial and porcine bioprostheses, utilizing a nationwide administrative claims database.
Methods
Adult patients (age ≥40 years) who underwent bioprosthetic AVR, without other valve replacements, between 2003 and 2018 were identified from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. The outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and valve-related events, including the incidence of reoperation, endocarditis, systemic thromboembolism, and major bleeding. Baseline adjustment was performed using propensity score matching. Time-related outcomes were evaluated using a competing risk analysis, with death as a competing risk.
Results
Among the 7714 patients who underwent bioprosthetic AVR, 5621 (72.9%) received bovine pericardial prostheses and 2093 (27.1%) received porcine bioprostheses. After matching, 1937 pairs were included in the final analysis. During follow-up (median, 4.49 years; interquartile range, 2.83-8.20 years), the use of porcine bioprostheses was associated with a higher risk of aortic valve reoperation (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16 to 3.01); however, no significant differences were observed in cumulative incidences of all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, thromboembolism, or major bleeding. Subgroup analyses revealed that the use of bovine valves was associated with improved survival in patients with diabetes mellitus, whereas in patients undergoing dialysis, porcine valves exhibited better survival than bovine valves.
Conclusions
In this large nationwide cohort study of patients undergoing bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement, the use of porcine prostheses was significantly associated with an increased risk of reoperation compared with the use of bovine prostheses, supporting previous findings.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery presents original, peer-reviewed articles on diseases of the heart, great vessels, lungs and thorax with emphasis on surgical interventions. An official publication of The American Association for Thoracic Surgery and The Western Thoracic Surgical Association, the Journal focuses on techniques and developments in acquired cardiac surgery, congenital cardiac repair, thoracic procedures, heart and lung transplantation, mechanical circulatory support and other procedures.