Long-term Survival Outcomes of Aortic Valve Prostheses: Biological vs. Mechanical in Middle-Aged Patients

By João L. Carapinha

February 17, 2025

Are mechanical aortic valves the overlooked champions in long-term patient survival? A recent article compared the long-term clinical outcomes in patients 50–70 years receiving biological versus mechanical aortic valve prostheses. This research provides valuable insights into the clinical effectiveness of different valve types.

Objectives

The primary objective was to compare long-term survival among patients receiving mechanical or biological aortic valve prostheses. Secondary objectives included assessing trends, early clinical outcomes, the need for repeat valvular intervention, and the effect of valve size and patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) on long-term outcomes.

Methods

The study included all consecutive patients 50-70 years who underwent isolated SAVR from 1996 to 2023. The study excluded patients with acute or chronic infective endocarditis, those undergoing emergency or salvage procedures, those with previous cardiac surgery, and recipients of an allograft or homograft.

The local audit committee approved the study, waived individual patient consent, and used prospectively collected data. The researchers divided patients into two groups based on whether they received a biological or mechanical prosthesis. Statistical analysis involved Pearson’s chi-squared test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and one-way/multifactor analysis of variance, with IPTW (inverse probability of treatment weighting) applied to balance covariates between the groups. The researchers used Kaplan–Meier plots and log-rank analysis to compare survival curves.

Results

The results indicated no significant differences in cardiopulmonary bypass time, aortic cross-clamp time, and in-hospital mortality. Similarly, return to theatre, neurological events, post-operative need for dialysis, or deep sternal wound infection were not different between the two groups. Notably, patients who received mechanical aortic valve prostheses showed better long-term survival compared to those with biological prostheses (log-rank, P < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in freedom from repeat valvular intervention between the groups.

The study highlighted the significance of PPM, particularly with smaller-sized valves. Severe PPM was associated with poorer short-term and long-term outcomes. The incidence of severe PPM was higher in this study compared to other reports, such as the PARTNER trials.

Conclusion

This study is limited by its single-institution design, retrospective nature, and lack of randomization, which may introduce various biases. Also, the absence of echocardiographic information and potential residual biases due to unmeasured confounders were noted.

The findings suggest that mechanical aortic valve prostheses may offer superior long-term survival benefits for patients aged 50-70 years. This is particularly true with smaller-sized valves. This challenges the prevailing trend favoring biological valves in this demographic. The authors emphasize the need for careful consideration of the longevity benefits associated with mechanical valves, despite the requirement for long-term anticoagulation.

The study has notable implications for decision-making in SAVR for individuals in the 50-70 age group. It suggests a reconsideration of the choice between biological and mechanical aortic valve prostheses based on long-term survival benefits and the impact of PPM.

Reference url

Recent Posts

Zimislecel type 1 diabetes
   

Cell Therapy for Type 1 Diabetes: Vertex Trial Results and Market Potential

🚀 What if we could revolutionize Type 1 diabetes treatment?

Vertex Pharmaceuticals has made significant strides with its promising phase 1/2 trial results for **zimislecel**, a stem cell-derived therapy that not only restores insulin production but also drastically reduces severe hypoglycemic events. As phase 3 trials commence, this breakthrough could reshape care for T1D patients and potentially reduce long-term healthcare costs.

Curious to learn how zimislecel and other potential cell therapies may redefine diabetes management? Click to read more!

#SyenzaNews #biotechnology #HealthEconomics

biosimilar clinical approach
    

Biosimilar Clinical Approach

🚀 How is the EMA’s new biosimilar clinical approach changing the landscape of drug approvals in Europe?

With a focus on tailored clinical assessments, the EMA is streamlining the pathway for biosimilars by allowing analytical data to take precedence over large-scale comparative efficacy studies. This shift promises to enhance patient access to life-saving therapies while maintaining rigorous safety standards.

Dive deeper into the implications of this innovative regulatory approach and find out how it can impact health economics and market access.

👉 Read more in the full article!
#SyenzaNews #regulatoryaffairs #MarketAccess

HIV prevention injection
   

FDA Approval and Access Strategy for Lenacapavir (Yeztugo) Long-Acting HIV Prevention

🌍 Will Yeztugo Approval and Access Strategy Deliver an Inflection Point in HIV/AIDS?

Yeztugo (lenacapavir), a twice-yearly injection, redefines long-acting HIV prevention with 96–100% efficacy. Gilead’s access strategy—insurance, assistance, and generics for 120 countries—targets global impact. Can it balance $28,218 U.S. costs with equity for 1.3M annual infections? My article explores health economics, public health, and market dynamics.

📖 Read how Yeztugo’s access strategy could transform long-acting HIV prevention

#SyenzaNews #GlobalHealth #HIVPrevention #Yeztugo #PrEP

When you partner with Syenza, it’s like a Nuclear Fusion.

Our expertise are combined with yours, and we contribute clinical expertise and advanced degrees in health policy, health economics, systems analysis, public finance, business, and project management. You’ll also feel our high-impact global and local perspectives with cultural intelligence.

SPEAK WITH US

CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS

1950 W. Corporate Way, Suite 95478
Anaheim, CA 92801, USA

© 2025 Syenza™. All rights reserved.