Long-term durability of bioprosthetic valves in pulmonary position: Pericardial versus porcine valves

Abstract

ObjectivesThe long-term durability of the 2 most commonly used types of bioprosthetic valves in the pulmonic position, the porcine and pericardial valves, is unclear. We compared the long-term durability of the pericardial (Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT [CE]) and porcine (Hancock II) valves in the pulmonic position in patients with congenital cardiac anomalies. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 258 cases (248 patients) of pulmonary valve implantation or replacement using CE (129 cases, group CE) or porcine (129 cases, group H) valves from 2 institutions between 2001 and 2009. ResultsThe patients' age at pulmonary valve implantation was 14.9 ± 8.7 years. No significant differences in perioperative characteristics were observed between groups CE and H. Follow-up data were complete in 219 cases (84.9%) and the median follow-up duration was 10.5 (interquartile range, 8.4∼13.0) years. Ten mortalities (3.9%) occurred. Sixty-four patients underwent reoperation for pulmonary valve replacement due to prosthetic valve failure; 10 of these 64 patients underwent reoperation during the study period. Patients in group CE were significantly more likely to undergo reoperation (hazard ratio, 2.17; confidence interval, 1.26-3.72; P = .005) than patients in group H. Patients in group CE showed had a greater prosthetic valve dysfunction (moderate-to-severe pulmonary regurgitation or pulmonary stenosis with ≥3.5 m/s peak velocity through the prosthetic pulmonary valve) rate (hazard ratio, 1.83; confidence interval, 1.07-3.14; P = .027) than patients in group H. ConclusionsCompared with the pericardial valve, the porcine valve had long-term advantages in terms of reduced reoperation rate and prosthetic valve dysfunction in the pulmonic position in patients with congenital cardiac anomalies.