Mechanical versus biological mitral valve replacement: Insights from propensity score matching on survival and...

Patients with symptomatic mitral valve disease unsuitable for repair can be sufficiently treated with surgical mitral valve replacement. The decision between biological and mechanical mitral valve replacement can be difficult, especially due to the question of the lesser of 2 evils: anticoagulation versus reoperation.

This single-center, retrospective study included all patients undergoing mitral valve replacement between 2001 and 2020. Thirty-day mortality and periprocedural complications were analyzed. Propensity score matching adjusted for age, gender, weight, height, endocarditis, diabetes, hypertension, peripheral arterial occlusive disease, atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease, cancer, and history of neurological disorders was performed. After propensity score matching, survival and cumulative incidence of reoperation at time of follow-up were analyzed.

The study included 2027 patients in 2 main groups: 1658 patients with biological mitral valve replacement and 369 patients with mechanical mitral valve replacement; 51.2% were male. Age at surgery was 65.9 ± 12.9 years. Median follow-up time was 6.83 years (interquartile range, 1.11-10.61 years). Concomitant procedures were performed in 1467 cases (72.4%). Propensity score matching yielded comparable groups of 339 pairs. Both groups showed comparable survival (P = .203). Survival after mechanical mitral valve replacement and biological mitral valve replacement was comparable for all analyzed time points over the course of 20 years. Patients with mechanical mitral valve replacement showed a significantly lower cumulative incidence for reoperation (20 years: 15% vs 59%, P < .001).

Follow-up of 20 years at a high-volume center demonstrates comparable survival after mechanical or biological mitral valve replacement, whereas reoperation rates are significantly lower after mechanical mitral valve replacement.