Porcine or Bovine Tissue Valves: Which are Better for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement?

The choice between mechanical and bioprosthetic aortic valve implants is affected by relatively clear criteria. However, the choice between porcine or pericardial valve is more complex regarding bioprosthetic devices. We aimed to elucidate any hemodynamic and clinical difference between two widely u...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Georgi Manchev, Valya Goranovska, Georgi Stoitsev, Boyan Markov, Vassil Gegouskov
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Medical University - Pleven 2023-12-01
Series:Journal of Biomedical & Clinical Research
Subjects:
Online Access:https://jbcr.arphahub.com/article/34695/download/pdf/
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849409130681335808
author Georgi Manchev
Valya Goranovska
Georgi Stoitsev
Boyan Markov
Vassil Gegouskov
author_facet Georgi Manchev
Valya Goranovska
Georgi Stoitsev
Boyan Markov
Vassil Gegouskov
author_sort Georgi Manchev
collection DOAJ
description The choice between mechanical and bioprosthetic aortic valve implants is affected by relatively clear criteria. However, the choice between porcine or pericardial valve is more complex regarding bioprosthetic devices. We aimed to elucidate any hemodynamic and clinical difference between two widely used bioprosthetic valves: the Sorin Mitroflow bovine pericardial valve and the St. Jude Medical Epic Supra porcine valve. We retrospectively studied 71 consecutive patients separated into two groups based on the valve they received. Clinical outcomes included patient survival and hemodynamic performance of the implanted prostheses. Patients were assessed at one and five years postoperatively. Mean transprosthetic pressure gradients were used as a marker of hemodynamic performance. The Mitroflow valve exhibited lesser mean transvalvular gradients than the Epic valve for all labelled sizes at one and five years postoperatively. The 5-year survival was equal between groups. Both prostheses demonstrated a small but significant increase in mean pressure gradients in the fifth year. Most patients enjoyed significant clinical improvement as assessed by NYHA functional class. Both bioprostheses performed very well with excellent hemodynamic parameters. The pericardial valves are a safe and appropriate choice for surgical bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement.
format Article
id doaj-art-1fe58ee8bb8d4274bf6f011cbd0ffa6d
institution Kabale University
issn 1313-9053
language English
publishDate 2023-12-01
publisher Medical University - Pleven
record_format Article
series Journal of Biomedical & Clinical Research
spelling doaj-art-1fe58ee8bb8d4274bf6f011cbd0ffa6d2025-08-20T03:35:36ZengMedical University - PlevenJournal of Biomedical & Clinical Research1313-90532023-12-0116217017910.2478/jbcr-2023-002334695Porcine or Bovine Tissue Valves: Which are Better for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement?Georgi Manchev0Valya GoranovskaGeorgi StoitsevBoyan MarkovVassil Gegouskov St. Anna University HospitalThe choice between mechanical and bioprosthetic aortic valve implants is affected by relatively clear criteria. However, the choice between porcine or pericardial valve is more complex regarding bioprosthetic devices. We aimed to elucidate any hemodynamic and clinical difference between two widely used bioprosthetic valves: the Sorin Mitroflow bovine pericardial valve and the St. Jude Medical Epic Supra porcine valve. We retrospectively studied 71 consecutive patients separated into two groups based on the valve they received. Clinical outcomes included patient survival and hemodynamic performance of the implanted prostheses. Patients were assessed at one and five years postoperatively. Mean transprosthetic pressure gradients were used as a marker of hemodynamic performance. The Mitroflow valve exhibited lesser mean transvalvular gradients than the Epic valve for all labelled sizes at one and five years postoperatively. The 5-year survival was equal between groups. Both prostheses demonstrated a small but significant increase in mean pressure gradients in the fifth year. Most patients enjoyed significant clinical improvement as assessed by NYHA functional class. Both bioprostheses performed very well with excellent hemodynamic parameters. The pericardial valves are a safe and appropriate choice for surgical bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement.https://jbcr.arphahub.com/article/34695/download/pdf/aortic valvebioprosthesispericardial valvepo
spellingShingle Georgi Manchev
Valya Goranovska
Georgi Stoitsev
Boyan Markov
Vassil Gegouskov
Porcine or Bovine Tissue Valves: Which are Better for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement?
Journal of Biomedical & Clinical Research
aortic valve
bioprosthesis
pericardial valve
po
title Porcine or Bovine Tissue Valves: Which are Better for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement?
title_full Porcine or Bovine Tissue Valves: Which are Better for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement?
title_fullStr Porcine or Bovine Tissue Valves: Which are Better for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement?
title_full_unstemmed Porcine or Bovine Tissue Valves: Which are Better for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement?
title_short Porcine or Bovine Tissue Valves: Which are Better for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement?
title_sort porcine or bovine tissue valves which are better for surgical aortic valve replacement
topic aortic valve
bioprosthesis
pericardial valve
po
url https://jbcr.arphahub.com/article/34695/download/pdf/
work_keys_str_mv AT georgimanchev porcineorbovinetissuevalveswhicharebetterforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement
AT valyagoranovska porcineorbovinetissuevalveswhicharebetterforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement
AT georgistoitsev porcineorbovinetissuevalveswhicharebetterforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement
AT boyanmarkov porcineorbovinetissuevalveswhicharebetterforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement
AT vassilgegouskov porcineorbovinetissuevalveswhicharebetterforsurgicalaorticvalvereplacement