Prosthesis choice for surgical treatment of left-sided native valve infective endocarditis: Determinants and impact on outcomes

Abstract

Surgical treatment is required in approximately half of the patients with infective endocarditis (IE) because of severe complications. To date there is no recommendation favoring a specific valve substitute for IE treatment and accordingly there is a wide variation in routine surgical management of these patients. The purpose of this study is to describe surgical practices in our center and to investigate the impact on clinical outcomes. All patients with native valve left-sided IE, who underwent valve replacement surgery with a mechanical or biological prosthesis in our institution between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2018 were enrolled in this retrospective study. A total of 303 patients were included (mean age = 58 years, 80% men). Patients in whom a biological valve was chosen (64%, n = 194) were older and had more comorbid conditions compared to patients who received a mechanical valve (36%, n = 109). In hospital mortality was respectively 19% ( n = 36) in the bioprosthesis group avec 3% ( n = 3) in the mechanical valve group ( P < 0.0001). The mortality rates at 1 and 3 years were 35% and 41% in the biological valve group, these rates were 8% and 15% in the mechanical valve group. Factors associated to in hospital and mid term mortality were age, comorbid conditions, hemodynamic failure, a double valve replacement or associated bypass surgery. The type of the implanted valve substitute was not independently associated with mortality. For surgical management of IE, a biological valve is the most used valve substitute in our institution. Mechanical valves seem to be implanted in a very selected and low-risk patient subgroup. The valve substitute does not appear to be related to in hospital nor to midterm mortality rates.