BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Thromboembolism and hemorrhage related to anticoagulation remain a major concern in elderly patients with mechanical valves. Clinical results following isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) with tilting disk and bileaflet prostheses in patients aged over 70 years were analyzed and compared with results in patients aged <45 years. METHODS: Between January 1980 and August 2002, 319 consecutive older patients (group A) and 497 young patients AVR. Preoperative clinical data, early and late mortality, valve-related complications and data related to anticoagulation status (including mean INR and mean interval between INR assays) were compared between groups. RESULTS: Hospital mortality was lower in group B (3.4%) than in group A (10.7%; p <0.0001). Twelve-year actuarial survival was lower in older patients (54% in group A versus 78% in group B; p <0.001). The two groups showed similar 12-year actuarial freedom from hemorrhage (99.6% versus 99.5%; p = 0.69), endocarditis (99.6% versus 98.43%; p = 0.25) and perivalvular leak (99.6% versus 97.9%; p = 0.21). However, actuarial freedom from thromboembolism was lower in older patients (98.8% versus 99.7%; p = 0.041). CONCLUSION: Despite lower rates of long-term mortality and thromboembolism (the latter because of advanced atherosclerosis) in group A, there were no differences in rates of other valve-related complications. Hence, older age cannot be considered a contraindication to implantation of mechanical valves in the aortic position.
BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Thromboembolism and hemorrhage related to anticoagulation remain a major concern in elderly patients with mechanical valves. Clinical results following isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) with tilting disk and bileaflet prostheses in patients aged over 70 years were analyzed and compared with results in patients aged <45 years. METHODS: Between January 1980 and August 2002, 319 consecutive older patients (group A) and 497 young patients AVR. Preoperative clinical data, early and late mortality, valve-related complications and data related to anticoagulation status (including mean INR and mean interval between INR assays) were compared between groups. RESULTS: Hospital mortality was lower in group B (3.4%) than in group A (10.7%; p <0.0001). Twelve-year actuarial survival was lower in older patients (54% in group A versus 78% in group B; p <0.001). The two groups showed similar 12-year actuarial freedom from hemorrhage (99.6% versus 99.5%; p = 0.69), endocarditis (99.6% versus 98.43%; p = 0.25) and perivalvular leak (99.6% versus 97.9%; p = 0.21). However, actuarial freedom from thromboembolism was lower in older patients (98.8% versus 99.7%; p = 0.041). CONCLUSION: Despite lower rates of long-term mortality and thromboembolism (the latter because of advanced atherosclerosis) in group A, there were no differences in rates of other valve-related complications. Hence, older age cannot be considered a contraindication to implantation of mechanical valves in the aortic position.