Clinical Characteristics, Procedural Factors, and Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Mechanical and Bioprosthetic Heart Valves.

Available online from MWHC library: 1995 - present, Available in print through MWHC library: 1999 - 2006

Copyright (c) 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.

There is scarcity of evidence regarding antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy in patients with prosthetic valves undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Our goal was to compare clinical outcomes between patients with mechanical or bioprosthetic valves undergoing PCI. The study population comprised patients with either a bioprosthetic or mechanical heart valve in the aortic and/or mitral position undergoing PCI between January 2003 and July 2017. Demographics, admission, and discharge medications as well as procedural details were documented. Outcomes were postprocedural bleeding, length of stay, and in-hospital deaths. Of 211 patients, we identified 119 and 92 patients with a bioprosthetic or mechanical valve, respectively. Mean age was 75 +/- 9 years and 66 +/- 12 years in bioprosthetic and mechanical valve patients, respectively. Bare-metal stents were used in 18.2% and 30.1% of bioprosthetic and mechanical valve patients, respectively. Major bleeding was documented in 0.8% and 6.5% of bioprosthetic and mechanical valve patients, respectively (p=0.04). Use of triple therapy (aspirin AND clopidogrel AND oral vitamin K antagonist) was significantly lower in bioprosthetic valve patients compared with mechanical valve patients (12% vs 68%, p <0.001). Our study shows variation in periprocedural anticoagulation and/or antiplatelet choice exists in this population. Patients with mechanical valves experienced higher rates of major bleeding compared with patients with bioprosthetic valves, which could be due to concomitant anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet therapy.

English