Share this page on LinkedIn
Share This Page on Google+
Share This Page on Twitter
tell someone about this page print this page
You are here: Contents > 2012 > Volume 21 Number 1 January 2012 > MITRAL VALVE DISEASE > Risk of Reoperation for Mitral Bioprosthesis Dysfunction

Risk of Reoperation for Mitral Bioprosthesis Dysfunction

Nicolas Jaussaud, Vlad Gariboldi, Dominique Grisoli, Julie Berbis, François Kerbaul, Alberto Riberi, Frederic Collart 

Service de Chirurgie Cardiaque, Service de Santé Publique et d’Information Médicale, Service d’Anesthésie-réanimation, Hôpital de la Timone, Marseille, France

Background and aim of the study: Today, when a mitral valve replacement is required, more patients and surgeons choose a bioprosthesis. Yet, the rationale of this choice is unclear in patients in whom age represents a predicting factor for reoperation. The study aim was to define the risk factors for reoperation after mitral bioprosthesis failure.
Methods: A total of 282 consecutive patients (202 women, 80 men; mean age at surgery 61 years; range: 28-88 years) who underwent reoperation for mitral bioprosthesis failure between 1990 and 2006 was reviewed. Surgery was undertaken because of bioprosthesis degeneration (91%), prosthetic valve infective endocarditis (6%), paravalvular leak (2%), or other causes (1%). Emergency procedures were performed in 7% of cases. Associated procedures included tricuspid valve surgery in 16% of patients (tricuspid valve repair in 11%, tricuspid valve replacement in 5%) and coronary artery bypass graft in 5%. Almost one-fifth of patients (18%) had undergone more than one previous mitral valve replacement.

Results: The overall operative mortality was 7.4% (n = 21). Factors identified (by multivariate analysis) as predictors of operative death included: presence of diabetes mellitus (odds ratio (OR) = 8.69, 95% CI 2.55-29.61; p = 0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR = 9.01, 95% CI 1.72-47.18; p = 0.009), NYHA class III/IV (OR = 5.46, 95% CI 1.41-21.16; p = 0.01), and pulmonary artery pressure >60 mmHg (OR = 3.13, 95% CI 1.10-8.94; p = 0.03). Associated procedures were not significant risk factors for mortality. New prostheses were mechanical in 68% of cases, and bioprostheses in 32%.
Conclusion: One reoperation for mitral bioprosthesis dysfunction is acceptable if the patient can be expected to survive to reoperation while free from comorbidities and the severe effects of mitral disease.
The application of strict selective criteria to recipients at the first valve replacement, combined with a close follow up, may allow this goal to be achieved.


The Journal of Heart Valve Disease 2012;21:56-60
Risk of Reoperation for Mitral Bioprosthesis Dysfunction

Click the above hyperlink to view the article, right click (Ctrl click on a Mac) to open in a new browser window or tab.

Purchase this Article

Please click the button below to purchase this article. Single article purchases are provided at $50.00 per article. Upon clicking the button below, single article user account subscription details are requested and, upon successful payment, a single article user account is created. Single articles are availble in your account for seven days after purchase.