Should a Mechanical or Biological Prosthesis Be Used for a Tricuspid Valve Replacement? A Meta-Analysis

Journal of Cardiac Surgery

Volumn 31, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 294-302

  Liu, Peng ^a   Qiao, Wei Hua ^a   Sun, Fu Qiang ^a   Ruan, Xin Long ^a   Al Shirbini, Mahmoud ^a   Hu, Dan ^a   Chen, Si ^a   Dong, Nian Guo ^a  

^a HUAZHONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTICOAGULANT AGENT;

ARTICLE; BLEEDING; HUMAN; LONG TERM SURVIVAL; META ANALYSIS; PACEMAKER IMPLANTATION; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; PROSTHESIS THROMBOSIS; REOPERATION; RISK FACTOR; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SURVIVAL RATE; THROMBOEMBOLISM; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TRICUSPID VALVE PROSTHESIS; TRICUSPID VALVE REPLACEMENT;

EID: 84985007043     PISSN: 08860440     EISSN: 15408191     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jocs.12730     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, et al: 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: Executive summary: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014; 63(22):2438–2488.
2. Chang BC, Lim SH, Yi G, et al: Long-term clinical results of tricuspid valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2006; 81(4):1317–1323, discussion 23–4.
3. Kaplan M, Kut MS, Demirtas MM, et al: Prosthetic replacement of tricuspid valve: Bioprosthetic or mechanical. Ann Thorac Surg 2002; 73:467–473.
4. Tierney JF, Stewart LA, Ghersi D, et al: Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis. Trials 2007; 8(1):16.
5. Rizzoli G, Vendramin I, Nesseris G, et al: Biological or mechanical prostheses in tricuspid position? A meta-analysis of intra-institutional results. Ann Thorac Surg 2004; 77(5):1607–1614.
6. Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Willett WC, Wong JB, et al: Fracture preventionwith vitaminD supplementation: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 2005; 293(18):2257–2264.
7. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al: The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 2007; 370(9596):1453–1457.
8. Munro AI, Jamieson WR, Tyers GF, et al: Tricuspid valve replacement porcine bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses. Ann Thorac Surg 1995; 59:S470–S474.
9. van Nooten GJ, Caes FL, Francois KJ, et al: The valve choice in tricuspid valve replacement: 25 years of experience. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1995; 9:441–446.
10. van Nooten G J, Caes F, Taeymans Y, et al: Tricuspid valve replacement: Postoperative and long-term results. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995; 110:672–679.
11. Scully HE, Armstrong CS: Tricuspid valve replacement: Fifteen years of experience with mechanical prostheses and bioprostheses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995; 109:1035–1041.
12. Farinas JM, Leclerc Y, Antchouey AM, et al: Le remplacement valvulaire tricuspidien: Suivi clinique et echographique a long terme. Annales de Chirurgie 1996; 50:707–712.
13. Hayashi J, Saito A, Yamamoto K, et al: Is a bioprosthesis preferable in tricuspid valve replacement? Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996; 44:230–233.
14. Ratnatunga CP, Edwards MB, Dore CJ, et al: Tricuspid valve replacement: UK heart valve registry mid-term results comparing mechanical and biological prostheses. Ann Thorac Surg 1998; 66:1940–1947.
15. Rizzoli G, de Perini L, Bottio T, et al: Prosthetic replacement of the tricuspid valve: Biological or mechanical? Ann Thorac Surg 1998; 66:S62–S67.
16. Dalrymple Hay MJ, Leung Y, Ohri SK, et al: Tricuspid valve replacement: Bioprostheses are preferable. J Heart Valve Dis 1999; 8(6):644–648.
17. Do QB, Pellerin M, Carrier M, et al: Remplacement valvulaire tricuspide isole. Resultats a long terme. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss 2000; 93:1119–1124.
18. Do QB, Pellerin M, Carrier M, et al: Clinical outcome after isolated tricuspid valve replacement: 20-year experience. Can J Cardiol 2000; 16(4):489–493.
19. Carrier M, Hebert Y, Pellerin M, et al: Tricuspid valve replacement: An analysis of 25 years of experience at a single center. Ann Thorac Surg 2003; 75:47–50.
20. Solomon NAG, Lim RCH, Nand P, et al: Tricuspid valve replacement: Bioprosthetic or mechanical valve? Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann 2004; 12:143–148.
21. Filsoufi F, Anyanwu AC, Salzberg SP, et al: Long-term outcomes of tricuspid valve replacement in the current era. Ann Thorac Surg 2005; 80(3):845–850.
22. Brown ML, Dearani JA, Danielson GK, et al: Comparison of the outcome of porcine bioprosthetic versus mechanical prosthetic replacement of the tricuspid valve in the Ebstein anomaly. Am J Cardiol 2009; 103(4):555–561.
23. Sung K, Park PW, Park KH, et al: Is tricuspid valve replacement a catastrophic operation? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2009; 36(5):825–829.
24. Garatti A, Nano G, Bruschi G, et al: Twenty-five year outcomes of tricuspid valve replacement comparing mechanical and biologic prostheses. Ann Thorac Surg 2012; 93(4):1146–1153.
25. Hwang HY, Kim KH, Kim KB, et al: Mechanical tricuspid valve replacement is not superior in patients younger than 65 years who need long-term anticoagulation. Ann Thorac Surg 2012; 93(4):1154–1160.
26. Cho WC, Park CB, Kim JB, et al: Mechanical valve replacement versus bioprosthetic valve replacement in the tricuspid valve position. J Card Surg 2013; 28(3):212–217.
27. Altaani HA, Jaber S: Tricuspid valve replacement, mechnical vs. biological valve, which is better? Int Cardiovasc Res J 2013; 7(2):71–74.
28. Hwang HY, Kim KH, Kim KB, et al: Propensity score matching analysis of mechanical versus bioprosthetic tricuspid valve replacements. Ann Thorac Surg 2014; 97(4):1294–1299.
29. Songur CM, Simsek E, Ozen A, et al: Long term results comparing mechanical and biological prostheses in the tricuspid valve position: Which valve types are better-mechanical or biological prostheses? Heart Lung Circ 2014; 23(12):1175–1178.
30. van Slooten YJ, Freling HG, van Melle JP, et al: Long-term tricuspid valve prosthesis-related complications in patients with congenital heart disease. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2014; 45(1):83–89.