Prognosis after aortic valve replacement in dialysis patients: results from the Swedish Renal Registry

Abstract Background The choice of aortic valve prosthesis in stenosis patients is based on patient preference, preoperative age, life expectancy, need for anticoagulant therapy and durability. Major uncertainties remain regarding optimal prosthetic dialysis patients. Objectives aim the study was to compare clinical outcomes after replacement with mechanical (MAV) or bioprosthetic valves (BAV) Methods We used observational, prospective, multicenter cohort from Swedish Renal Registry, which includes all Sweden. included 294 who underwent MAV BAV (obtained surgical procedure codes) between 2005 2018, either before (n=155) start (n=139). Comorbidities net adverse events (bleeding events, stroke reoperation) were obtained national registries defined by International Classification Diseases codes (ICD-10). incidence rate (IR) primary endpoint comprised all-cause death, bleeding reoperation, as well only death rates recipients estimated Kaplan – Meier curves. Results median age 72 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 63.9, 77.3), 77% males 60% received valves. During a follow-up 1.49 (IQR: 0.66–2.83), occurred 202 Compared BAV-recipients, those had comparable IR end-point (40.1/100 person-years; [95% Confidence Interval (CI): 33.7–47.7], vs 36.2/100 CI: 28.9–45.4], P=0.322) (Figure 1). Mortality at 1-year 28.9% without difference (68.8% MAV-group 57.6% BAV; mortality 33.3/100 person-year; (95% 27.9–39.8) 27.3/100 21.5–34.6), P=0. 183)), 2). Additional statistical analysis secondary occurrence intervention start, consistent main results. Conclusion There no complication BAV. Funding Acknowledgement Type funding sources: None.