Should the tricuspid valve be replaced with a mechanical or biological valve?
A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether patients requiring tricuspid replacement should have a mechanical or a biological valve. Using the reported search, 561 papers were identified. Thirteen papers represented the best evidence on the subject. The author, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes, weaknesses, results and study comments were tabulated. We conclude that there are no major differences between the insertion of a mechanical or biological tricuspid valve. Aggregating the available data it is found that the reoperation rate is similar with bioprosthetic degeneration rate being equivalent to the mechanical thrombosis rate. Conversely up to 95% of patients with a bioprosthesis still receive anticoagulation. Survival in over 1000 prostheses pooled by meta-analysis was equivalent between biological and mechanical valves.
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK.
Babu
B
Kunadian
Kunadian
K
Vijayalakshmi
Sankar
S
Balasubramanian
Joel
J
Dunning
D001705:Bioprosthesis; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D006350:Heart Valve Prosthesis; D019918:Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; D006801:Humans; D014261:Tricuspid Valve / Q000601:surgery*