Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2019 Jun 21;116(25):423-430.
doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2019.0423.

The Use of Biological Heart Valves

Sami Kueri  1 , Fabian A Kari, Rafael Ayala Fuentes, Hans-Hinrich Sievers, Friedhelm Beyersdorf, Wolfgang Bothe
Affiliations
Review

The Use of Biological Heart Valves

Sami Kueri et al. Dtsch Arztebl Int. .

Abstract

Background: Biological heart-valve prostheses have undergone continuous devel- opment up to the present, and technological advances have been made in catheter- assisted valve systems (transcatheter aortic valve implantation, TAVI) and minimally invasive routes of application. These parallel trends have led to major changes in therapeutic strategies, widening the spectrum of patients who are candidates for biological aortic valve implantation.

Methods: This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a systematic search in PubMed employing the search terms "conventional biological aortic pros- thesis," "rapid deployment prosthesis," and "transcatheter aortic valve implantation/ replacement."

Results: Among biological heart-valve prostheses, a distinction is drawn between stented (conventional, rapid-deployment, and catheter-assisted) and non-stented types. The long-term durability of conventional, surgically implantable biological valve protheses is by far the best documented: the reported 5-year reoperation rates range from 13.4% to 36.6%, and the pacemaker implantation rate is ca. 4%. Rapid-deployment prostheses combine the advantages of conventional and ca- theter-assisted techniques and facilitate minimally invasive approaches. The TAVI method is currently recommended for high- and intermediate-risk patients, while conventional valve replacement remains the method of choice for those at low risk. Rapid-deployment and TAVI prostheses is associated with a higher pacemaker im- plantation rate than conventional prostheses: these rates are 8.5-15.3% for TAVI and 6.0-8.8% for rapid-deployment valves. The intermediate-term durability of catheter-assisted and rapid-deployment prostheses appears promising, but their long-term durability is still unclear.

Conclusion: The further development of biological heart-valve prostheses in the form of improved conventional, transcatheter, and rapid-deployment prostheses now enables individualized treatment. Before any such procedure is performed, the car- diac team must assess the patient's risk profile and the advantages and disadvan- tages of each type of prosthesis to determine which is best.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure
Figure
Types of biological heart valve prostheses—an overview (adapted from Puri et al. [e2])
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Yacoub MH, Takkenberg JJ. Will heart valve tissue engineering change the world? Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2005;2:60–61. - PubMed
    1. Beckmann A, Funkat AK, Lewandowski J, et al. German Heart Surgery Report 2016: the annual updated registry of the German Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;65:505–518. - PubMed
    1. Weber A, Noureddine H, Englberger L, et al. Ten-year comparison of pericardial tissue valves versus mechanical prostheses for aortic valve replacement in patients younger than 60 years of age. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;144:1075–1083. - PubMed
    1. McClure RS, Narayanasamy N, Wiegerinck E, et al. Late outcomes for aortic valve replacement with the Carpentier-Edwards pericardial bioprosthesis: up to 17-year follow-up in 1,000 patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010;89:1410–1416. - PubMed
    1. Chambers JB, Rajani R, Parkin D, et al. Bovine pericardial versus porcine stented replacement aortic valves: early results of a randomized comparison of the Perimount and the Mosaic valves. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008;136:1142–1148. - PubMed