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
. 2021 Jul 26;33(2):181-187.
doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivab066.

Late results after mitral valve replacement with Mosaic bioprosthesis in patients aged 65 years or younger

Affiliations

Late results after mitral valve replacement with Mosaic bioprosthesis in patients aged 65 years or younger

Giovanni A Chiariello et al. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. .

Abstract

Objectives: Although in younger patients indications for biological prosthesis implantation in mitral valve replacement remain controversial, recently bioprostheses use increased considerably. We present late results obtained with the Medtronic Mosaic bioprosthesis in patients aged 65 years or younger.

Methods: Between 2007 and 2017, 67 mitral Mosaic bioprostheses were implanted in patients aged 65 years or younger (58.5 ± 6.4 years). Follow-up extended up to 13 years. Survival, freedom from structural valve degeneration, endocarditis, thromboembolic events and reoperation were considered as main clinical end points evaluated at 1, 5 and 10 years.

Results: The mean follow-up was 4.7 ± 2.8 years. Overall mortality rate was 12%. At 1, 5 and 10 years, survival was 94 ± 3%, 89 ± 4% and 77 ± 9%, respectively. Freedom from structural valve degeneration was 100%, 94 ± 4% and 71 ± 21%. Freedom from endocarditis was 95 ± 3%, 90 ± 6% and 84 ± 8%. Freedom from thromboembolic events was 94 ± 3%, 90 ± 5% and 90 ± 5%. Freedom from reoperation was 94 ± 3%, 87 ± 5% and 65 ± 19%.

Conclusions: Mosaic bioprosthesis appears a valid mitral valve substitute even when employed in ≤65-year-old patients.

Keywords: Bioprosthesis; Mitral valve replacement; Survival.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
Kaplan–Meier curve showing survival after Mosaic bioprosthesis.
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
Kaplan–Meier curve showing freedom from structural valve degeneration after Mosaic bioprosthesis.
Figure 3:
Figure 3:
Kaplan–Meier curve showing freedom from prosthetic endocarditis.
Figure 4:
Figure 4:
Kaplan–Meier curve showing freedom from thromboembolic events.
Figure 5:
Figure 5:
Kaplan–Meier curve showing freedom from reoperation.
None

References

    1. Goldstone AB, Chiu P, Baiocchi M, Lingala B, Patrick WL, Fischbein MP. et al. Mechanical or biologic prostheses for aortic-valve and mitral-valve replacement. N Engl J Med 2017;377:1847–57. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Russo A, Grigioni F, Avierinos JF, Freeman WK, Suri R, Michelena H. et al. Thromboembolic complications after surgical correction of mitral regurgitation incidence, predictors, and clinical implications. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:1203–11. - PubMed
    1. Chiang YP, Chikwe J, Moskowitz AJ, Itagaki S, Adams DH, Egorova NN.. Survival and long-term outcomes following bioprosthetic vs mechanical aortic valve replacement in patients aged 50 to 69 years. JAMA 2014;312:1323–9. - PubMed
    1. Rieß F-C, Fradet G, Lavoie A, Legget M.. Long-term outcomes of the mosaic bioprosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 2018;105:763–9. - PubMed
    1. David TE, Ivanov J, Armstrong S, Feindel CM, Cohen G.. Late results of heart valve replacement with the Hancock II bioprosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2001;121:268–77. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources