Percutaneous Versus Surgical Pulmonic Valve Implantation for Right Ventricular Outflow Tract Dysfunction

Percutaneous pulmonic valve implantation (PPVI) is an alternative treatment strategy to surgical pulmonic valve implantation (SPVI) for right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) dysfunction. This study sought to compare outcomes of both treatment strategies.

The study population was extracted from the 2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes for PPVI and SPVI. Study outcomes included all-cause in-hospital mortality, length of index hospital stay (LOS), post-procedural bleeding, mechanical complications of heart valve prosthesis, vascular complications (VC), infective endocarditis (IE), total hospitalization charges, and 30-day readmission rates.

A total of 975 patient discharges (176 in PPVI and 799 in SPVI group) were identified (average age 25.7 years; 57.5% male). PPVI was associated with significantly shorter median LOS (1 versus 5 days, p < 0.01), lower risk of bleeding (4.6% versus 26.4%, p < 0.01), and lower total hospitalization charges ($169,551.7 versus $210,681.8, p = 0.02). There was no significant difference between both groups in terms of all-cause in-hospital mortality (0% versus 1.4%, p = 0.12), mechanical complications of heart valve prosthesis (1.7% versus 2.0%, p = 0.78), VC (2.3% versus 2.0%, p = 0.82), IE (1.7% versus 3.1%, p = 0.31), or 30-day readmission rates (4.4% versus 7.6%, p = 0.16).

Compared with SPVI, PPVI was associated with shorter LOS, lower bleeding, and lower total charges. There was no significant difference between the two strategies in terms of all-cause in-hospital mortality, mechanical complications of heart valve prosthesis, VC, IE, or 30-day readmission rates.