This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
Acute thrombosis of bioprosthetic mitral valve
© Kwon et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013
Received: 22 March 2013
Accepted: 27 August 2013
Published: 27 August 2013
We report a case of acute thrombosis of bioprosthetic mitral valve in a 59 year–old Korean female, who underwent a mitral valve replacement with a 25 mm Carpentier - Edwards PERIMOUNT Plus bioprosthesis (Edwards Lifesciences, Inc.; Irvine, CA, USA) and a mini-Maze procedure for correction of mitral stenosis (MS) and atrial fibrillation (AF). On the 10th postoperative day, the patient began to complain of increasing dyspnea and general malaise. Her symptoms worsened and developed into pulmonary edema. Echocardiography revealed a mean diastolic pressure gradient (MDPG) of 10 mmHg across the mitral valve and pressure-half time (PHT) of 166 msec. Due to progressive decompensated heart failure, the patient underwent a repeat sternotomy to replace the bioprosthetic mitral valve. Intraoperatively, we found a thrombosis around the bioprosthetic mitral valve. We excised the bioprosthetic mitral valve and replaced it with a 27 mm ATS mechanical valve (ATS medical, Inc.; Minneapolis, MN, USA). We experienced a rare case that required an early reoperation for a thrombosis of the bioprosthetic valve.
The advantage of using a bioprosthetic valve over a mechanical valve is that it lowers the incidence of thrombosis, avoiding the need for anticoagulant medication in the long term.
The reported incidence of bioprosthetic valve thrombosis on routine echocardiography surveillance is approximately 6% . However, the occurrence of acute thrombosis of the bioprosthetic mitral valves during the early postoperative period is rare.
We experienced a rare case requiring an early reoperation for a thrombosis of the bioprosthetic valve.
A 59-year old Korean female was referred with shortness of breath. She was diagnosed with moderate mitral stenosis (MS, valve area: 1.07 cm2 by 2D) and atrial fibrillation (AF). Preoperative echocardiography showed a large left atrium (LA Volume Index: 81 ml / m2).
She underwent preservation of the sub-valvular apparatus of posterior leaflet of the mitral valve and replacement with a 25 mm Carpentier – Edwards PERIMOUNT Plus bioprosthesis (Edwards Lifesciences, Inc.; Irvine, CA, USA) and a mini-Maze procedure. Due to her history of hemorrhagic stroke, we selected the bioprosthetic valve in order to avoid anticoagulation. Her body surface area (BSA) was 1.72 m2. The intraoperative transesophageal echocardiogram after the first valve replacement shows no evidence of leaflet entrapment, and bypass weaning was uneventful.
A few studies on the diagnostic characteristics and management of late bioprosthetic valve thrombosis have been reported.
Patients with bioprosthetic aortic or mitral valve replacement have high risk of thromboembolism during the first 10 days . However, within two weeks postoperatively, the occurrence of a thrombosis in bioprosthetic mitral valves is very rare.
Some precipitating factors of the thrombotic process include acting as an underlying coagulopathy, left ventricular dysfunction, low cardiac output, atrial fibrillation, large LA size, and prior history of thromboembolic events .
A few cases involving the preservation of the mitral valve apparatus as a predisposing factor for bioprosthetic valve thrombosis have been reported because a complete preservation of the mitral valve apparatus during mitral replacement may lead to an increased incidence of early bioprosthetic thrombosis, although such incidences appear to be rare . However, a complication of mitral valve replacement, such as a left ventricular rupture could be prevented by maintaining the tethering effect of the intact subvalvular apparatus . In addition, there are isolated reports of bioprosthetic thrombosis after a complete valve excision .
Incidence of thrombo-embolism associated with AF ablation is reported to be between 0% and 7%; therefore, the 2007 Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement recommends a minimum period of two months of warfarin anticoagulation . Although the policy of postoperative anticoagulation are different in each heart center, it took a long time for INR to reach 2.0 on the 6th postoperative day. We should have taken care of more optimal anticoagulation. The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines recommend an administration of warfarin for three months, following bioprosthetic valve replacement (BVR) . The risk is particularly high in the first few days after surgery, and many centers start UFH as soon as the risk of increased surgical bleeding is reduced (usually within 24 to 48 h) with maintenance of aPPT between 55 and 70 seconds. After an overlap of UFH and warfarin for 3 to 5 days, UFH may be discontinued when INR reaches 2.0 to 3.0 .
In our case, the patient had a large LA size, and underwent posterior leaflet preservation and a mini-Maze procedure. In this case, even though multiple factors are contributed to acute bioprosthetic thrombosis, we should keep up with current anticoagulation guidelines following the BVR and radioablative Maze procedure.
Further studies are needed in order to clarify the anticoagulation strategy after BVR.
Through this case, we also realized the importance of postoperative echocardiographic surveillance in high risk groups.
The occurrence of bioprosthetic valve thrombosis is uncommon. However, there are some predisposing factors of bioprosthetic valve thrombosis; these include underlying coagulopathy, left ventricle dysfunction, AF, large LA size, prosthetic mismatch, and radioablative Maze procedure.
Therefore, an anticoagulant medication should be maintained and echocardiographic surveillance should be considered for patients in high risk groups.
Written informed consent was obtained from the patient for publication of this case report and accompanying images. A copy of the written consent is available for review by the Editor-in-Chief of this journal.
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIP) (No.2005-0049417).
- Oliver JM, Galloge P, Gonzalez A, Dominguez FJ, Gamallo C, Mesa JM: Bioprosthetic mitral valve thrombosis: clinical profile, Transesophageal echocardiographic features, and follow-up after anticoagulant therapy. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 1996, 9: 691-699. 10.1016/S0894-7317(96)90066-8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Magda H, James HC, Valentin F, William JP, Diane EG, Kent RB, Gordon KD, Thomas AO, James RP, Francisco JP, Hartzell VS, Jeffrey JL: High risk of thromboemboli early after bioprosthetic cardiac valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995, 25: 1111-1119. 10.1016/0735-1097(94)00563-6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Thomas B, Carreras F, Borras X, Pons-Lladó G: An unusual case of bioprosthetic mitral valve thrombosis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001, 72: 259-261. 10.1016/S0003-4975(00)02497-8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Korkolis DP, Passik CS, Marshalko SJ, Koullias GJ: Early bioprosthetic mitral valve “pseudostenosis” after complete preservation of the native mitral apparatus. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002, 74: 1689-1691. 10.1016/S0003-4975(02)03862-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Okita Y, Miki S, Veda Y, Tahata T, Saki T, Matsugama K: Mitral valve replacement with maintenance of mitral annulopapillary muscle continuity in patients with mitral stenosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1994, 108: 42-51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Calkins H, Brugada J, Packer DL, Cappato R, Chen SA, Crijns HJ, Damiano RJ, Davies DW, Haines DE, Haissaguerre M, Iesaka Y, Jakman W, Jais P, Kottkamp H, Kuck KH, Lindsay BD, Marchlinski FE, McCarthy PM, Mont JL, Morady F, Nademanee K, Natale A, Pappone C, Prystowsky E, Raviele A, Ruskin JN, Shemin RJ: HRS/EHRA/ECAS expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: recommendations for personnel, policy, procedures and follow-up. A report of the heart rhythm society (HRS) task force on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation. Hear Rhythm. 2007, 4: 816-861. 10.1016/j.hrthm.2007.04.005.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC, Faxon DP, Freed MD, Gaasch WH, Lytle BW, Nishimura RA, O’Rourke RA, Otto CM, Shah PM, Shanewise JS: 2008 focused update incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American college of cardiology/American heart association task force on practice guidelines (writing committee to revise the 1998 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease). Endorsed by the society of cardiovascular anesthesiologists, society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions, and society of thoracic surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008, 52: e1-e142. 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.05.007.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.