Mechanical versus biological aortic valve implants in the elderly. A comparison of early and mid-term results

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to compare, in a non randomized study, the surgical outcome in elderly patients with mechanical (Group 1; n=83) and bioprosthetic valve implants (Group 2; n=136). METHODS: During a three year period, 219 patients >75 years underwent Aortic Valve Replacement. The groups matched according to age, sex, comorbidity, valve pathology and concomitant Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery. Follow-up was a total of 469 patient-years (mean follow-up 2.1 years, maximum 4,4 years). RESULTS: Operative mortality was zero and the overall early mortality was 2.3 % (within 30 days). Actuarial survival was 87.5 ± 4.0% and 66.1 ± 7.7% (NS) at 4 years in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively. Freedom from valve-related death was 88.9 ± 3.8% in Group 1 and 69.9±7.9% (NS) in Group 2 at 4 years. CONCLUSION: Aortic Valve Replacement in the elderly (>75 years) is a safe procedure even in cases where concomitant coronary artery revascularization is performed. Only a few anticoagulant-related complications were reported and this may indicate that selected groups of elderly patients with significant life expectancy may benefit from mechanical implants .

Evaluation of the marker of hypercoagulability prothrombin fragment F 1+2 in patients with mechanical or biological heart valve prostheses

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether patients with heart valve prostheses and similar International Normalized Ratios (INR) have the same level of protection against thromboembolic events, that is, whether the anticoagulation intensity is related to the intensity of hypercoagulability supression. METHODS: INR and plasma levels of prothrombin fragment 1+2 (F1+2) were assessed in blood samples of 27 patients (7 with mechanical heart valves and 20 with biological heart valves) and 27 blood samples from healthy donors that were not taking any medication. RESULTS: Increased levels of F1+2 were observed in blood samples of 5 patients with heart valve prostheses taking warfarin. These findings reinforce the idea that even though patients may have INRs, within the therapeutic spectrum, they are not free from new thromboembolic events. CONCLUSION: Determination of the hypercoagulability marker F1+2 might result in greater efficacy and safety for the use of oral anticoagulants, resulting in improved quality of life for patients.