Background-Several centers favor replacing a diseased native heart valve with a tissue rather than a mechanical prosthesis, even in younger adult patients. However, long-term data supporting this approach are lacking. We examined the survival implications of selecting a tissue versus a mechanical prosthesis at initial left-heart valve replacement in a cohort of adults Ͻ60 years of age who were followed for over 20 years. Methods and Results-Comorbid and procedural data were available from 6554 patients who underwent valve replacement at our institution over the last 35 years. Of these, 1512 patients contributed follow-up data beyond 20 years, of whom 567 were adults Ͻ60 years of age at first left-heart valve operation (mean survivor follow-up, 24.0Ϯ3.1 years). Late outcomes were examined with Cox regression. Valve reoperation, often for prostheses that are no longer commercially available, occurred in 89% and 84% of patients by 20 years after tissue aortic and mitral valve replacement, respectively, and was associated with a mortality of 4.3%. There was no survival difference between patients implanted with a tissue versus a mechanical prosthesis at initial aortic valve replacement (hazard ratio 0.95; 95% CI: 0.7, 1.3; Pϭ0.7). For mitral valve replacement patients, long-term survival was poorer than after aortic valve replacement (hazard ratio 1.4; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.8; Pϭ0.003), but again no detrimental effect was associated with use of a tissue versus a mechanical prosthesis (hazard ratio 0.9; 95% CI 0.5, 1.4; Pϭ0.5). Conclusions-In

These analyses identify independent predictors of congestive heart failure symptoms and congestive heart failure death late after aortic valve replacement and indicate that prosthesis size has a significant effect on this cardiac end point, but not on overall survival after aortic valve replacement.

In middle-aged patients, MAPE may occur more often in patients with bioprosthetic valves, but definitive conclusions necessitate the accumulation of additional follow-up. At present, these data do not support lowering the usual cutoff for implantation of a tissue valve below the age of 65.

Patient-prosthesis mismatch after mitral valve replacement is not uncommon; it is associated with recurrence of congestive heart failure and postoperative pulmonary hypertension and independently affected late survival. This study emphasizes the importance of implanting a sufficiently large prosthesis in adult patients undergoing mitral valve replacement.

Late outcomes of modern prosthetic valves in young adults remain suboptimal. Bioprostheses deserve consideration in the aortic position, as mechanical valves are associated with lower physical capacity, a higher prevalence of disability, and poorer disease perception. Early surgical referral and atrial fibrillation surgery may improve survival after MVR.