BACKGROUND: Bioprostheses are widely used as an aortic valve substitute, but knowledge about prognosis is still incomplete. The purpose of this study was to provide insight into the age-related life expectancy and actual risks of reoperation and valve-related events of patients after aortic valve replacement with a porcine bioprosthesis. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a meta-analysis of 9 selected reports on stented porcine bioprostheses, including 5837 patients with a total follow-up of 31 874 patient-years. The annual rates of valve thrombosis, thromboembolism, hemorrhage, and nonstructural dysfunction were 0.03%, 0.87%, 0.38%, and 0.38%, respectively. The annual rate of endocarditis was estimated at 0.68% for >6 months of implantation and was 5 times as high during the first 6 months. Structural valve deterioration was described with a Weibull model that incorporated lower risks for older patients. These estimates were used to parameterize, calibrate, and validate a mathematical microsimulation model. The model was used to predict life expectancy and actual risks of reoperation and valve-related events after implantation for patients of different ages. For a 65-year-old male, these figures were 11.3 years, 28%, and 47%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of meta-analysis with microsimulation enabled a detailed insight into the prognosis after aortic valve replacement with a bioprosthesis for patients of different ages. This information will be useful for patient counseling and clinical decision making. It also could serve as a baseline for the evaluation of newer valve types.
BACKGROUND: Bioprostheses are widely used as an aortic valve substitute, but knowledge about prognosis is still incomplete. The purpose of this study was to provide insight into the age-related life expectancy and actual risks of reoperation and valve-related events of patients after aortic valve replacement with a porcine bioprosthesis. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a meta-analysis of 9 selected reports on stented porcine bioprostheses, including 5837 patients with a total follow-up of 31 874 patient-years. The annual rates of valve thrombosis, thromboembolism, hemorrhage, and nonstructural dysfunction were 0.03%, 0.87%, 0.38%, and 0.38%, respectively. The annual rate of endocarditis was estimated at 0.68% for >6 months of implantation and was 5 times as high during the first 6 months. Structural valve deterioration was described with a Weibull model that incorporated lower risks for older patients. These estimates were used to parameterize, calibrate, and validate a mathematical microsimulation model. The model was used to predict life expectancy and actual risks of reoperation and valve-related events after implantation for patients of different ages. For a 65-year-old male, these figures were 11.3 years, 28%, and 47%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of meta-analysis with microsimulation enabled a detailed insight into the prognosis after aortic valve replacement with a bioprosthesis for patients of different ages. This information will be useful for patient counseling and clinical decision making. It also could serve as a baseline for the evaluation of newer valve types.
Authors: M A J van Kelle; P J A Oomen; W J T Janssen-van den Broek; R G P Lopata; S Loerakker; C V C Bouten Journal: J R Soc Interface Date: 2018-11-14 Impact factor: 4.118
Authors: J J M Takkenberg; J P A Puvimanasinghe; L A van Herwerden; M J C Eijkemans; E W Steyerberg; J D F Habbema; A J J C Bogers Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 2.380
Authors: J P A Puvimanasinghe; J J M Takkenberg; M B Edwards; M J C Eijkemans; E W Steyerberg; L A Van Herwerden; K M Taylor; G L Grunkemeier; J D F Habbema; A J J C Bogers Journal: Heart Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 5.994