Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 1, 2026

Full-root Aortic Valve Replacement by Stentless Aortic Xenografts in Patients with Small Aortic Roots
Published on: May 21, 2017
Comparison of survival after mitral valve replacement with biologic and mechanical valves in 1139 patients
Y Y Cen1, D D Glower, K Landolfo
1Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Insights
This study found no significant difference in 10-year survival for patients undergoing mitral valve replacement with biologic versus mechanical prostheses. Valve choice did not impact long-term outcomes in this patient cohort.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Cardiac Surgery
- Biomedical Engineering
Background:
- Mitral valve replacement is a critical procedure for patients with severe mitral valve disease.
- The choice between biologic and mechanical valve prostheses involves considerations of durability, anticoagulation, and patient survival.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the 10-year survival rates of patients who underwent mitral valve replacement using either biologic (Carpentier-Edwards) or mechanical (St. Jude Medical) valve prostheses.
- To identify factors influencing long-term survival after mitral valve replacement.
Main Methods:
- A retrospective survival analysis was conducted on 1139 adult patients who underwent mitral valve replacement.
- Data included patients receiving Carpentier-Edwards (biologic) or St. Jude Medical (mechanical) prostheses.
- Statistical analysis compared 10-year survival between the two prosthesis groups.
Main Results:
- No statistically significant difference in 10-year survival was observed between the Carpentier-Edwards and St. Jude Medical prosthesis groups (P =.16).
- Adjusted 10-year survival estimates were 42% ± 3% for Carpentier-Edwards and 51% ± 3% for St. Jude Medical.
- Factors associated with poorer survival included older age, lower ejection fraction, advanced heart failure, comorbidities (CAD, renal disease), and prior cardiac surgery.
Conclusions:
- The selection of a biologic or mechanical prosthesis does not significantly impact long-term patient survival following mitral valve replacement.
- Patient-specific factors and comorbidities are critical determinants of long-term outcomes after mitral valve replacement.
Objective:
We sought to compare 10-year survival in patients after mitral valve replacement with biologic or mechanical valve prostheses.
Methods:
Retrospective survival analysis was performed on data from 1139 consecutive patients older than 18 years of age undergoing mitral valve replacement with Carpentier-Edwards (n = 495; Baxter Healthcare Corp, Irvine, Calif) or St Jude Medical (n = 644; St Jude Medical, Inc, St Paul, Minn) prostheses.
Results:
The 10-year survival was not statistically different between the patients receiving Carpentier-Edwards valves and those receiving St Jude Medical valves (P =.16). Adjusted survival estimates at 2, 5, and 10 years were 82% +/- 2% (95% confidence intervals, 79%-85%), 69% +/- 2% (95% confidence intervals, 64%-73%), and 42% +/- 3% (95% confidence intervals, 37%-48%), respectively, for the Carpentier-Edwards group and 83% +/- 2% (95% confidence intervals, 80%-86%), 72% +/- 2% (95% confidence intervals, 69%-76%), and 51% +/- 3% (95% confidence intervals, 45%-58%), respectively, for the St Jude Medical group. Predictors of worse survival after mitral valve replacement are older age, lower ejection fraction, presence of class IV congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, renal disease, smoking history, hypertension, concurrent other valve surgery, and redo heart surgery.
Conclusion:
Choice of biologic or mechanical prosthesis does not significantly affect long-term patient survival after mitral valve replacement.
Related Concept Videos
Mitral Valve Prolapse I: Introduction
Mitral Valve Prolapse II: Assessment and Management
Mitral Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests
Mitral Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Mitral Stenosis I: Introduction
Mitral Stenosis III: Medical Management

