The article, "bovine pericardial versus porcine bioprosthetic aortic valves: a nationwide population-based cohort study in korea", was reviewed.The article presented a retrospective, multicenter study to compare the clinical outcomes of aortic valve replacement using bovine pericardial and porcine bioprostheses, utilizing a nationwide administrative claims database.Devices included in this study were hancock ii valve, mosaic valve, sjm epic valve, sjm epic supra valve, sjm bicor porcine valve, toronto spv valve, soprano pericardial heart valve, carpentier edwards perimount magna tfx valve, carpentier edwards perimount valve, pericarbon more pericardial heart valve, avalus bioprosthesis, trifecta valve, mitroflow aortic pericardial heart valve/crown prt aortic heart valve, intuity elite valve system, and perceval s.The article concluded in this large nationwide cohort study of patients undergoing bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement utilization of porcine prostheses was significantly associated with an increased risk of reoperation than that of bovine prostheses, supporting previous findings.[the primary and corresponding author was joon bum kim, department of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, asan medical center, university of ulsan college of medicine, olympic-ro 43-gil, songpa-gu, 20 seoul, 05505, republic of korea, with corresponding email: jbkim1975@amc.Seoul.Kr].
|
D4 - the udi number is not known as the part and lot numbers were not provided.Summarized patient outcomes/complications comparing bovine with porcine valve replacement outcomes were reported in a research article.Some of the complications reported were endocarditis, reoperation, thromboembolism, hemorrhage, and hospitalization.A more comprehensive assessment could not be performed as the event was non-contemporaneously reported through a literature review and no device or individual patient information was received for analysis.There is no indication of a product quality issue with regards to manufacture, design, or labeling.
|