BACKGROUND: Although the clinical performance of bioprostheses after valve replacement in the aortic and mitral position has been reported, little is known of the performance of tricuspid bioprostheses. The mechanism of bioprosthetic valve dysfunction after tricuspid valve replacement (TVR) is not clear. METHODS: We reviewed 98 cases of TVR with bioprostheses. To clarify the causes of valve dysfunction, pathologic examination of the explanted valve at the reoperation was performed. RESULTS: Actuarial survival at 18 years was 68.7% +/- 5.8%. There were 12 redo TVRs. In six of the 12 cases, isolated redo TVR was performed. In the other cases, concomitant cardiac procedures were performed. The causes of prosthetic valve dysfunction were pannus formation on the cusps of the right ventricle side (four cases), native valve attachment (two cases), pannus formation + native valve attachment (two cases), sclerotic change (one case), pannus formation + sclerotic change (one case), and native valve attachment + valve infection (one case). Freedom from reoperation, structural valve deterioration, and nonstructural dysfunction at 18 years was 62.7% +/- 10.7%, 96.0% +/- 2.9%, and 76.7% +/- 8.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In our 18 years of experience, although the survival after TVR with bioprostheses is acceptable, the reoperation free rate is not satisfactory. Pannus formation on the cusps of the ventricular side seems to be a serious problem that causes bioprosthetic dysfunction in the tricuspid position.
BACKGROUND: Although the clinical performance of bioprostheses after valve replacement in the aortic and mitral position has been reported, little is known of the performance of tricuspid bioprostheses. The mechanism of bioprosthetic valve dysfunction after tricuspid valve replacement (TVR) is not clear. METHODS: We reviewed 98 cases of TVR with bioprostheses. To clarify the causes of valve dysfunction, pathologic examination of the explanted valve at the reoperation was performed. RESULTS: Actuarial survival at 18 years was 68.7% +/- 5.8%. There were 12 redo TVRs. In six of the 12 cases, isolated redo TVR was performed. In the other cases, concomitant cardiac procedures were performed. The causes of prosthetic valve dysfunction were pannus formation on the cusps of the right ventricle side (four cases), native valve attachment (two cases), pannus formation + native valve attachment (two cases), sclerotic change (one case), pannus formation + sclerotic change (one case), and native valve attachment + valve infection (one case). Freedom from reoperation, structural valve deterioration, and nonstructural dysfunction at 18 years was 62.7% +/- 10.7%, 96.0% +/- 2.9%, and 76.7% +/- 8.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In our 18 years of experience, although the survival after TVR with bioprostheses is acceptable, the reoperation free rate is not satisfactory. Pannus formation on the cusps of the ventricular side seems to be a serious problem that causes bioprosthetic dysfunction in the tricuspid position.