Durability of bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement in patients under the age of 60 years - 1-year follow-up from the prospective INDURE registry
- PMID: 37462612
- PMCID: PMC10576637
- DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivad115
Durability of bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement in patients under the age of 60 years - 1-year follow-up from the prospective INDURE registry
Abstract
Objectives: We report 1-year safety and clinical outcomes in patients <60 years undergoing bioprosthetic surgical aortic valve intervention.
Methods: The INSPIRIS RESILIA Durability Registry is a prospective, multicentre registry to assess clinical outcomes of patients <60 years. Patients with planned SAVR with or without concomitant replacement of the ascending aorta and/or coronary bypass surgery were included. Time-related valve safety, haemodynamic performance and quality of life (QoL) at 1 year were assessed.
Results: A total of 421 patients were documented with a mean age of 53.5 years, 76.5% being male and 27.2% in NYHA class III/IV. Outcomes within 30 days included cardiovascular-related mortality (0.7%), time-related valve safety (VARC-2; 5.8%), thromboembolic events (1.7%), valve-related life-threatening bleeding (VARC-2; 4.3%) and permanent pacemaker implantation (3.8%). QoL was significantly increased at 6 months and sustained at 1 year. Freedom from all-cause mortality at 1 year was 98.3% (95% confidence interval 97.1; 99.6) and 81.8% were NYHA I versus 21.9% at baseline. No patient developed structural valve deterioration stage 3 (VARC-3). The mean aortic pressure gradient was 12.6 mmHg at 1 year and the effective orifice area was 1.9 cm2.
Conclusions: The 1-year data from the INSPIRIS RESILIA valve demonstrate good safety and excellent haemodynamic performance as well as an early QoL improvement.
Clinical trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03666741.
Keywords: Structural valve degeneration; Surgical aortic valve replacement; Valve durability.
© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery.
Figures





References
-
- McClure RS, McGurk S, Cevasco M, Maloney A, Gosev I, Wiegerinck EM et al Late outcomes comparison of nonelderly patients with stented bioprosthetic and mechanical valves in the aortic position: a propensity-matched analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014;148:1931–9. - PubMed
-
- 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
-
- Vahanian A, Beyersdorf F, Praz F, Milojevic M, Baldus S, Bauersachs J et al; ESC/EACTS Scientific Document Group. 2021 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J 2022;43:561–632. - PubMed
-
- Writing Committee M, Otto CM, Nishimura RA, Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Erwin JP 3rd, et al ACC/AHA Guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020;77:e25–e197. - PubMed