Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 2, 2026

Technique and Patient Selection Criteria of Right Anterior Mini-Thoracotomy for Minimal Access Aortic Valve Replacement
Published on: March 26, 2018
Surgical management of aortic valve disease in the elderly: A retrospective comparative study of valve choice using
Kevin D Accola1, Meredith L Scott, George J Palmer
1Cardiovascular Institute, Florida Hospital, Orlando, Florida, USA. KAccola@aol.com
Insights
For elderly patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR), Carpentier Edwards Perimount (CEP) bioprosthetic valves and St. Jude Medical (SJM) mechanical valves showed similar survival and cardiac event rates. Lifelong anticoagulation for mechanical valves is a key consideration.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Surgery
- Biomaterials Science
- Geriatric Medicine
Background:
- Aortic valve dysfunction is the most prevalent valvular heart disease.
- An aging population increases the number of candidates for aortic valve replacement (AVR).
- Prosthetic valve selection is critical for patient outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the outcomes of Carpentier Edwards Perimount (CEP) bioprosthetic valves and St. Jude Medical (SJM) mechanical valves in elderly patients undergoing AVR.
- To evaluate hospital mortality, morbidity, survival rates, and late cardiac events.
- To identify factors influencing mortality in AVR patients.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 801 patients (aged >=65 years) undergoing isolated AVR or AVR + CABG.
- Comparison between CEP (n=398) and SJM (n=403) valve recipients.
- Propensity scoring used to ensure group homogeneity and reduce bias.
- Follow-up data collected for survival and cardiac events.
Main Results:
- Operative mortality was 4.0% for CEP and 6.5% for SJM valves.
- Postoperative morbidities were similar between groups.
- Five-year actuarial survival was 70.9% for CEP and 71.8% for SJM; 10-year survival was 32.6% and 38.2%, respectively.
- Freedom from reoperation, stroke, and myocardial infarction showed no significant differences.
- Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and mechanical valve replacement were predictors of late death.
Conclusions:
- CEP and SJM valves demonstrate comparable outcomes in elderly AVR patients regarding mortality, morbidity, survival, and late cardiac events.
- The need for lifelong anticoagulation with mechanical valves is a significant factor in prosthetic choice.
- Careful consideration of valve type is essential for optimizing patient management.
Background And Aim Of The Study:
Aortic valve dysfunction is the most common form of valvular heart disease. As the population continues to age, a greater number of patients will become candidates for aortic valve replacement (AVR); hence, prosthetic valve choice becomes of paramount importance.
Methods:
A retrospective analysis was conducted on 801 patients aged > or =65 years who underwent isolated AVR or AVR + coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between January 1989 and June 2003 with a Carpentier Edwards Perimount (CEP) pericardial bioprosthesis (n = 398) or a St. Jude Medical (SJM) mechanical valve (n = 403). The mean age of CEP patients was 74.5 years (range: 65-89 years), and of SJM patients 73.9 years (range: 65-90 years). The follow up was 96.2% and 96.5% complete for CEP and SJM patients, respectively. Propensity scoring was used to establish homogeneity of the groups and reduce bias.
Results:
The operative mortality was 4.0% (n = 16) among CEP patients and 6.5% (n = 26) among SJM patients. Predictors of hospital mortality included: peripheral vascular disease (p = 0.018), surgical urgency (p = 0.010), preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) (p = 0.010), intraoperative perfusion time (p = 0.046) and intraoperative IABP (p = 0.001). Postoperative morbidities were similar for the two groups. The mean follow up was 72.4 and 59.2 months for CEP and SJM patients, respectively. The five-year actuarial survival was 70.9 +/- 2.3% for CEP and 71.8 +/- 2.4% for SJM patients; at 10 years the actuarial survival was 32.6 +/- 3.3% and 38.2 +/- 3.8%, respectively. Freedom from reoperation for AVR, stroke and non-fatal myocardial infarction was 98.8% (159/161), 99.4% (160/161) and 99.4% (160/161), respectively, in CEP patients, and 100.0% (220/220), 97.7% (215/220) and 97.7% (215/220), respectively, in SJM patients (p = NS). Predictors of late death (>30 days) included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (p = 0.001) and mechanical valve replacement (p = 0.001).
Conclusion:
In comparable elderly patients, the outcomes of CEP and SJM valves after AVR showed no significant differences in hospital morbidity, mortality, mid-term survival or late cardiac events. However, the cumulative risk of lifelong anticoagulation with a mechanical valve is a serious consideration that must be factored into the selection algorithm.
Related Concept Videos
Aortic Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Mitral Stenosis III: Medical Management
Mitral Valve Prolapse II: Assessment and Management
Mitral Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Aneurysm III: Interprofessional Care
Mitral Valve Prolapse III: Nursing Management

