Advertisement

Longitudinal Hemodynamics of Aortic Bioprosthetic Valve in Hemodialysis Patients

Published:September 08, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semtcvs.2021.08.028
      We examined the hemodynamic profile of bioprosthetic aortic valves in patients on hemodialysis (HD), longitudinally, and assess the incidence of adverse changes detected by echocardiography. Of 1,146 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (AVR), 148 patients had end-stage renal disease requiring HD. Each patient on HD was matched one-to-one with a non-HD patient on the basis of propensity scores. The mean follow-up period was 3.3 years for the HD group and 5.9 years for the non-HD group. Follow-up information was available for 95.2%. Postoperative trends of valve hemodynamics derived from linear mixed-effect models showed significant group vs time interactions between the two groups. Stable hemodynamics was consistently observed in the non-HD group, whereas the HD group showed a decrease of -0.06 cm2/y (95% confidence interval (CI), -0.10 to -0.02) in effective orifice area, an increase of 0.8 mm Hg/year (95% CI, 0.4–1.1) in mean pressure gradient, and an increase of 0.08 m/s/year (95%CI, 0.02–0.13) in peak velocity. Cumulative incidence function of SVD more than stage 2 was significantly higher in the HD group (13.1% vs 3.1% at 5 years, Gray test p = 0.01). In a multivariable Fine-Gray analysis, diabetes was independently associated with SVD more than stage 2 in the HD group (subhazard ratio, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.25–2.89; p = 0.02). Survival free-from stenotic-type SVD was significantly lower in HD patients undergoing bioprosthetic AVR. Diabetes was independently associated with postoperative stenotic-type SVD in HD patients.

      Keywords

      Abbreviations:

      AVR (aortic valve replacement), CI (confidence interval), CIF (Cumulative incidence function), EF (ejection fraction), EOA (effective orifice area), HD (hemodialysis), LV (left ventricular), mPG (mean aortic valve pressure gradient), NF-κB (nuclear factor kappa B), OPG (osteoprotegerin), RANKL (receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa B ligand), SVD (structural valve deterioration)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Seminars in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      REFERENCE

        • Nishimura R.A.
        • Otto C.M.
        • Bonow R.O.
        • et al.
        2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines.
        Circulation. 2014; 129: e521-e643
        • Iyer A.
        • Malik P.
        • Prabha R.
        • et al.
        Early postoperative bioprosthetic valve calcification.
        Heart Lung Circ. 2013; 22: 873-874
        • Nakatsu T.
        • Minakata K.
        • Tanaka S.
        • et al.
        Intermediate-term outcomes of aortic valve replacement with bioprosthetic or mechanical valves in patients on hemodialysis.
        J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019; 157: 2177-2186
        • Ikeno Y.
        • Mukohara N.
        • Fukumura Y.
        • et al.
        Outcomes of valve replacement with mechanical prosthesis versus bioprosthesis in dialysis patients: A 16-year multicenter experience.
        J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019; 158: 48-56
        • Manghelli J.L.
        • Carter D.I.
        • Khiabani A.J.
        • et al.
        A 20-year multicenter analysis of dialysis-dependent patients who had aortic or mitral valve replacement: Implications for valve selection.
        J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019; 158: 805-813
        • Phan K.
        • Zhao D.F.
        • Zhou J.J.
        • et al.
        Bioprosthetic versus mechanical prostheses for valve replacement in end-stage renal disease patients: systematic review and meta-analysis.
        J Thorac Dis. 2016; 8: 769-777
        • Thourani V.H.
        • Sarin E.L.
        • Kilgo P.D.
        • et al.
        Short- And long-term outcomes in patients undergoing valve surgery with end-stage renal failure receiving chronic hemodialysis.
        J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012; 144: 117-123
        • Okita Y.
        • Okada Y.
        • Otsuji Y.
        • et al.
        Guidelines for surgical and interventional treatment of valvular heart disease (JCS 2012).
        Jpn Circ Soc. 2012; 42: 1-75
        • Sakakura R.
        • Asai T.
        • Suzuki T.
        • et al.
        Outcomes after aortic valve replacement for aortic valve stenosis, with or without concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting.
        Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019; 67: 510-517
        • Douglas P.S.
        • DeCara J.M.
        • Devereux R.B.
        • et al.
        American society of echocardiography standards; american college of cardiology foundation. echocardiographic imaging in clinical trials: American society of echocardiography standards for echocardiography core laboratories: endorsed by the american college of cardiology foundation.
        J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2009; 22: 755-765
        • Dvir D.
        • Bourguignon T.
        • Otto C.M.
        • et al.
        Standardized definition of structural valve degeneration for surgical and transcatheter bioprosthetic aortic valves.
        Circulation. 2018; 137: 388-399
        • Austin P.C.
        Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples.
        Stat Med. 2009; 28: 3083-3107
        • Gray R.
        A class of K-sample tests for comparing the cumulative incidence of a competing risk.
        Ann Stat. 1988; 16: 1141-1154
        • Fine J.P.
        • Gray R.J.
        A proportional hazard model for the subdistribution of a competing risk.
        J Am Stat Assoc. 1999; 94: 496-509
        • Ureña P.
        • Malergue M.C.
        • Goldfarb B.
        • et al.
        Evolutive aortic stenosis in hemodialysis patients: Analysis of risk factors.
        Nephrologie. 1999; 20: 21725
        • Ahmad Y.
        • Bellamy M.F.
        • Baker C.S.R.
        Aortic stenosis in dialysis patients.
        Semin Dial. 2017; 30: 224-231
        • Perkovic V.
        • Hunt D.
        • Griffen S.V.
        • et al.
        Accelerated progression of calcific aortic stenosis in dialysis patients.
        Nephron Clin Pract. 2003; 94: c40-c45
        • Collin-Osdoby P.
        Regulation of vascular calcification by osteoclast regulatory factors RANKL and osteoprotegerin.
        Circ Res. 2004; 95: 1046-1057
        • Kaden J.J.
        • Bickelhaupt S.
        • Grobholz R.
        • et al.
        Receptor activator of nuclear factor κB ligand and osteoprotegerin regulate aortic valve calcification.
        J Mol Cell Cardiol. 2004; 36: 57-66
        • Avbersek-Luznik I.
        • Malesic I.
        • Rus I.
        • et al.
        Increased levels of osteoprotegerin in hemodialysis patients.
        Clin Chem Lab Med. 2002; 40: 1019-1023
        • Nitta K.
        • Akiba T.
        • Uchida K.
        • et al.
        The progression of vascular calcification and serum osteoprotegerin levels in patients on long-term hemodialysis.
        Am J Kidney Dis. 2003; 42: 303-309
        • Steinmetz M.
        • Skowasch D.
        • Wernert N.
        • et al.
        Differential profile of the OPG/RANKL/RANK-system in degenerative aortic native and bioprosthetic valves.
        J Heart Valve Dis. 2008; 17: 187-193
        • Sakaue T.
        • Nakaoka H.
        • Shikata F.
        • et al.
        Biochemical and histological evidence of deteriorated bioprosthetic valve leaflets: the accumulation of fibrinogen and plasminogen.
        Biol Open. 2018; 7bio034009
        • Lorusso R.
        • Gelsomino S.
        • Lucà F.
        • et al.
        Type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with faster degeneration of bioprosthetic valve: results from a propensity score-matched Italian multicenter study.
        Circulation. 2012; 125: 604-614
        • McClure R.S.
        • Narayanasamy N.
        • Wiegerinck E.
        • et al.
        Late outcomes for aortic valve replacement with the Carpentier Edwards pericardial bioprosthesis: up to 17-year follow-up in 1,000 patients.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 2010; 89: 1410-1416
        • Rahimtoola S.H.
        Choice of prosthetic heart valve in adults: an update.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010; 55: 2413-2426
        • David T.E.
        • Armstrong S.
        • Maganti M.
        Hancock II bioprosthesis for aortic valve replacement: the gold standard of bioprosthetic valves durability?.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 2010; 90: 775-781
        • Chan V.
        • Kulik A.
        • Tran A.
        • et al.
        Long-term clinical and hemodynamic performance of the Hancock II versus the Perimount aortic bioprostheses.
        Circulation. 2010; 122: S10-S16
        • van Geldorp M.W.
        • Eric Jamieson WR
        • Kappetein A.P.
        • et al.
        Patient outcome after aortic valve replacement with a mechanical or biological prosthesis: weighing lifetime anticoagulant-related event risk against reoperation risk.
        J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009; 137: 881-886
        • Charytan D.
        Is left ventricular hypertrophy a modifiable risk factor in end-stage renal disease.
        Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens. 2014; 23: 578-585
        • Zoccali C.
        • Benedetto F.A.
        • Mallamaci F.
        • et al.
        Left ventricular mass monitoring in the follow-up of dialysis patients: prognostic value of left ventricular hypertrophy progression.
        Kidney Int. 2004; 65: 1492-1498
        • Glassock R.J.
        • Pecoits-Filho R.
        • Barberato S.H.
        Left ventricular mass in chronic kidney disease and ESRD.
        Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009; 4: S79-S91
        • Harnett J.D.
        • Kent G.M.
        • Barre P.E.
        • et al.
        Risk factors for the development of left ventricular hypertrophy in a prospectively followed cohort of dialysis patients.
        J Am Soc Nephrol. 1994; 4: 1486-1490
        • Park C.W.
        • Shin Y.S.
        • Kim C.M.
        • et al.
        Increased c-reactive protein following hemodialysis predicts cardiac hypertrophy in chronic hemodialysis patients.
        Am J Kidney Dis. 2002; 40: 1230-1239
        • Litwin S.E.
        • Grossman W.
        Diastolic dysfunction as a cause of heart failure.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993; 22: 49A-55A

      Linked Article

      • Commentary: Choice of Prosthesis in the Hemodialysis Patient: Everything Old is New Again
        Seminars in Thoracic and Cardiovascular SurgeryVol. 34Issue 4
        • Preview
          Valvular heart disease is particularly prevalent in the hemodialysis population, affecting 19.1% of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients, most commonly involving the aortic valve, and usually presenting as aortic stenosis.1 Valve selection in this population is particularly challenging. Mechanical valves are less vulnerable to the accelerated structural valve deterioration (SVD) observed in the bioprostheses of ESRD patients and were, in fact, the recommendation of the 1998 American College of Cardiology and/or American Heart Association Guidelines.
        • Full-Text
        • PDF
      • Commentary: Which Aortic Valve Prosthesis to Choose in End-Stage Renal Failure
        Seminars in Thoracic and Cardiovascular SurgeryVol. 34Issue 4
        • Preview
          In the present study the authors retrospectively evaluated the longitudinal hemodynamic changes of bioprosthetic aortic valves implanted in hemodialysis patients in an effort to document the frequency of structural valvular deterioration (SVD), as detected by echocardiography.1 When compared to propensity matched non-HD patients they discovered early onset and accelerated progression of SVD as evidenced by significant per annum decrements in effective orifice area and increases in mean pressure gradient and peak velocity that started as early as2 years post implant.
        • Full-Text
        • PDF