Background: Infective endocarditis (IE) is a serious disease, and in many cases, surgery is necessary. Whether the type of prosthesis implanted for aortic valve replacement (AVR) for IE impacts patient survival is a matter of debate. The aim of the present study is to quantify differences in long-term survival and recurrence of endocarditis AVR for IE according to prosthesis type among patients aged 40 to 65 years. Methods: This was an analysis of the INFECT-REGISTRY. Trends in proportion to the use of mechanical prostheses versus biological ones over time were tested by applying the sieve bootstrapped t-test. Confounders were adjusted using the optimal full-matching propensity score. The difference in overall survival was compared using the Cox model, whereas the differences in recurrence of endocarditis were evaluated using the Gray test. Results: Overall, 4365 patients were diagnosed and operated on for IE from 2000 to 2021. Of these, 549, aged between 40 and 65 years, underwent AVR. A total of 268 (48.8%) received mechanical prostheses, and 281 (51.2%) received biological ones. A significant trend in the reduction of implantation of mechanical vs. biological prostheses was observed during the study period (p < 0.0001). Long-term survival was significantly higher among patients receiving a mechanical prosthesis than those receiving a biological prosthesis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.546, 95% CI: 0.322–0.926, p = 0.025). Mechanical prostheses were associated with significantly less recurrent endocarditis after AVR than biological prostheses (HR 0.268, 95%CI: 0.077–0.933, p = 0.039). Conclusions: The present analysis of the INFECT-REGISTRY shows increased survival and reduced recurrence of endocarditis after a mechanical aortic valve prosthesis implant for IE in middle-aged patients.

Background: An unexplained condition that follows transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is platelet count reduction (PR). According to published research, patients with balloon-expandable valves (BEVs) had a greater PR than those with self-expandable valves (SEVs). Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence and clinical effects of PR following TAVI. Methods: In total, 1.122 adult TAVI patients were enrolled. Propensity score matching was carried out in a 1:1 ratio between patients with BEVs and those with SEVs. The analysis included changes in platelet count, in-hospital mortality, and early postoperative adverse events. Results: Notably, 632 patients were matched (BEV:316; SEV:316). All patients’ post-procedural platelet counts changed according to a parabolic curve, using a mixed regression model for repeated analyses (estimate = −0.931; standard error = 0.421; p = 0.027). The platelet count varied comparably in patients with BEVs and SEVs (estimate = −4.276, standard error = 4.760, p = 0.369). The average time for obtaining the nadir platelet count value was three days after implantation (BEV: 146 (108–181) vs. SEV: 149 (120–186); p = 0.142). Overall, 14.6% of patients (92/632) had post-procedural platelet count <100,000/µL. There was no difference between the two prosthesis types (BEV:51/316; SEV:41/316; p = 0.266). Thrombocytopenia was found to be significantly linked to blood product transfusions, lengthier stays in the intensive care unit and hospital, and in-hospital mortality. Conclusions: TAVI, irrespective of the type of implanted valve, is linked to a significant but temporary PR. Thrombocytopenia increases the risk of serious complications and in-hospital death in TAVI patients. To explore and clarify the causes and associated effects, further prospective research is necessary.

Background: Platelet count reduction (PR) is a common but unclear phenomenon that occurs after aortic bioprosthesis valve implantation (bio-AVR). This study aimed to investigate the occurrence and clinical impact of PR in patients receiving stented, rapid deployment (RDV), or stentless bioprostheses. Methods: 1233 adult bio-AVR patients were enrolled. Platelet count variation, early post-operative adverse events, and in-hospital mortality were analysed. Results: 944 patients received a stented valve, an RDV was implanted in 218 patients, and 71 patients had a stentless bioprosthesis. In all groups, the platelet count at discharge was lower than the baseline values (p < 0.001). The percentage of PR was 27% in the stented group, 56% in the RDV group, and 55% in the stentless group. A higher platelet reduction, reaching the minimum platelet value, was observed in the RDV (mean: −30.84, standard error (SE): 5.91, p < 0.001) and stentless (mean: 22.54, SE: 9.10, p = 0.03) groups compared to the stented group. A greater PR occurred as the size of the bioprosthesis increased in RDV (p = 0.01), while platelet count variation was not directly proportional to the stented bioprosthesis size (p < 0.001). PR was not affected by cardiopulmonary bypass (mean: −0.00, SE: 0.001, p = 0.635) or cross-clamp (mean: −0.00, SE: 0.002, p = 0.051) times in any of the groups. RDV subjects experienced more in-hospital adverse events. PR was found to be associated with ischemic strokes in the overall population. Conclusions: Bio-AVR is associated with significant but transient PR. RDV patients more likely experience significant PR and related adverse clinical events. PR is associated with ischemic strokes, regardless of the bioprosthesis type.

Background: Infective endocarditis(IE) is a serious disease and in many cases surgery is necessary. Whether the type of prosthesis implanted for aortic valve replacement(AVR) for IE impacts patient survival is a matter of debate. The aim of the present study is to quantify differences in long-term survival, recurrence of endocarditis AVR for IE according to prosthesis type among patients aged 40 to 65 years. Methods: This was an analysis of the INFECT-REGISTRY. Overall, 4365 patients were diagnosed and operated on for IE from 2000 to 2021. Of these, 549 aged between 40 and 65 years underwent AVR. 268(48.8%) received mechanical prostheses, and 281(51.2%) biological ones. Confounders were adjusted using optimal full matching propensity score. Results: A significant trend in reduction of implantation of mechanical vs biological prostheses was observed during the study period(p<0.0001). Long-term survival was significantly higher among patients receiving a mechanical prosthesis than those receiving a biological prosthesis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.546,95%CI: 0.322-0.926, p=0.025). Mechanical prostheses were significantly associated with less recurrent endocarditis after AVR (HR 0.268,95%CI:0.077-0.933,p=0.039).Conclusions: The present analysis of the INFECT-REGISTRY shows increased survival and reduced recurrence of endocarditis after mechanical aortic valve prosthesis implant for IE in middle-aged patients.