Early and late outcomes after aortic valve replacement, mitral valve replacement and mitral valve plasty for native and prosthetic valve endocarditis in the Netherlands
Clicks: 1
ID: 314260
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
1 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #30 of 47 articles by views in European Heart Journal - Imaging Methods and Practice
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Objectives The aim of this nationwide descriptive study is to assess short-, mid-, and long-term mortality risk following aortic valve replacement (AVR), mitral valve replacement (MVR) and mitral valve plasty (MVP) in patients with native valve endocarditis (NVE) and prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE). Mortality outcomes were also evaluated for biological and mechanical valve prostheses. Methods Patients with infective endocarditis who underwent AVR, MVR or MVP between 2013 and 2022 were included from the Netherlands Heart Registration. Patients were excluded in case of combined valve surgery, aortic root replacement, a history of non-valvular cardiac surgery followed by NVE and unclear surgical history precluding confirmation of PVE. Descriptive analyses were performed, and mortality risks were estimated using Kaplan–Meier analysis. Results 1810 patients were included, of whom 75.4% had NVE and 24.6% PVE. In NVE, short-term mortality was highest after MVR (13.2%), followed by AVR (4.6%) and MVP (3.8%). Long-term mortality risks were 32.1%, 22.3%, and 11.5%, respectively. In PVE, short-term mortality risk was highest in AVR (10.2%), followed by MVR (7.6%) and MVP (5.0%). Long-term mortality risks were 27.3%, 31.7% and 35.2%, respectively. Short-term mortality was similar between patients receiving biological and mechanical prosthesis in the AVR and MVR groups, whereas long-term mortality was higher among those who received biological prostheses. Conclusions This nationwide study shows that mortality after cardiac surgery for infective endocarditis considerably varies by valve and prosthesis type. In NVE, mortality was highest after MVR. In PVE, outcomes were comparable across procedures. Long-term mortality was lowest with mechanical prostheses.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7161769121
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Floris J Heinen, Annelot J L Peijster, Edouard L. Fu, Otto Kamp, S A J Chamuleau, Marco C. Post, Michelle D. van der Stoel, Mohammed-Ali Keyhan-Falsafi, Cees van Nieuwkoop, Jesper Hjortnaes, R J M Klautz, Wilco Tanis |
| Journal | European Heart Journal - Imaging Methods and Practice |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/ehjimp/qyag093
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.