The analysis of oauses of bioprosthetio valve dysfunction: the example of «UniLine» bioprosthesis

Aim: to assess the contribution of primary tissue failure, calcification, bacterial contamination and pannus to bioprosthetic valve dysfunction.

Materials and methods. To evaluate degenerative changes of the «UniLine» bioprosthesis explanted from the mitral position with macroscopic examination, light and scanning electron microscopy, and micro-computed tomography (micro-CT). Light microscopy was used to analyze cell composition, the presence of bacteria, the localization of calcific deposits and recipient cells. Scanning electron microscopy allowed confirming the presence of bacteria. Micro-CT was used to evaluate the deformation of the bioprosthetic elements, the distribution of calcific deposits and their volume in the valve tissue.

Results. The presence of pannus, calcification, primary tissue failure and bacterial contamination were found among the causes leading to bioprosthetic dysfunction. Prosthetic leaflets showed pannus growth from the inflow tract. Excessive circumferential pannus extended into outflow tract. Calcific deposits were mostly localized in the commissural zone and the central portion of the leaflets. The total volume of calcification accounted for 1/3 of the bioprosthetic tissue component. The relationship between calcification and stress-strain properties of the bioprosthetic elements has been indicated. The asymmetric deformation of the bioprosthetic stent frame and leaflets with 1.5-fold thickening of the last has been found. The areas with loose and fragmented collagen and elastic fibers contained red blood cells and neutrophils. Endothelial cells and fibroblastic cells were present in the outer surface layers. There were no signs of calcification in the areas accumulating cells and bacteria.

Conclusion. We can assume that primary tissue failure, calcification, bacterial contamination and pannus independently contribute to the onset of bioprosthetic heart valve dysfunction.

1. Bokerija LA, Gudkova RG. Cardiovascular surgery - 2015. Diseases and congenital anomalies of the circulatory system. M.: NCSSH im. A.N. Bakuleva, 2016: 208. [In Russ].

2. Ovcharenko EA, Klyshnikov KYu, Savrasov GV, Glushkova TV, Barbarash LS. Investigation of the hydrodynamic function of a minimally invasive aortic valve bioprosthesis. Complex Issues of Cardiovascular Diseases. 2016; 5 (2): 39-45. [In Russ].

3. Butany JW, Kesarwani R, Yau TM, Singh G, Thanga-roopan M, Nair V et al. The role of pannus in the longevity of an Ionescu-Shiley pericardial bioprosthesis. J CardSurg. 2006; 21 (5): 505-507. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8191.2006.00286.x.

4. Halevi R, Hamdan A, Marom G, Mega M, Raanani E, Haj-Ali R. Progressive aortic valve calcification: Threedimensional visualization and biomechanical analysis. Journal of Biomechanics. 2015; 48 (3):489-497. doi: 10.1016/jjbiomech.2014.12.004.

5. Lepidi H, Casalta JP, Gouriet F, Collart F, Habib G, Raoult D. Infective endocarditis incidentally discovered by pathological examination. J Clin Pathol. 2008; 612: 233-234. doi: 10.1136/jcp.2006.043836.

6. Muhamadijarov R.A., Rutkovskaja N.V, Sidorova O.D., Barbarash L.S. Study of the cellular composition of calcified heart valve bioprostheses. Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences. 2015; 20 (6): 662-668. [In Russ].

7. Mazzarella G, Bianco A, Lucariello A, Savarese L, Fiumarella A, Cerasuolo F et al. Cardiovascular prosthetic surgery: an analysis of cellular and molecular patterns underlying valve implantation failure. In Vivo. 2012; 26 (2): 271-275.

8. Anderson JM. Biological Responses to Materials. Annual Review of Materials Research. 2001; 31: 81-110. doi.org/10.1146/annurev.matsci.31.1.81.

9. Karakoyun SL, Gu Rsoy OM, Kalgik M., Coban Kokten S, Ozkan M. Alternative causes of bioreaction to prosthetic heart valves: three cases with pannus formation. Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars. 2014; 42 (1): 64-67. doi: 10.5543/tkda.2014.22737.

10. Oda T, Kato S, Tayama E, Fukunaga S, Akashi H, Aoyagi S. Pannus overgrowth after mitral valve replacement with a Carpentier-Edwards pericardial bioprosthesis. J Artif Organs. 2009; 12 (1): 55-57. doi: 10.1007/s10047-008-0445-0.

11. Miura T, Hazama S, Iwasaki K, Izumi K, Matsukuma S, Eishi K. A rapid structural degeneration of a porcine mitral valve. Ann Thorac Surg. 2012; 93 (5): e113-114. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.11.022.

12. Martin C, Sun W. Fatigue damage of collagenous tissues: experiment, modeling and simulation studies. J Long Term EffMed Implants. 2015; 25 (1-2): 55-73.

13. Pettenazzo E, Deiwick M, Thiene G, Molin G, Glasmacher B, Martignago F et al. Dynamic in vitro calcification of bioprosthetic porcine valves evidence of apatite crystallization. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2001; 121 (3): 500-509. doi: 10.1067/mtc.2001.112464.

14. PuhovDJe, Vasil’ev SV Zotov AS, Il’in MV, Rudyy AS. Micromorphology, composition, features of localization of mineral deposits of leaflets of aortic heart valves according to scanning electron microscopy and X-ray diffraction analysis. Bulletin of Pirogov National Medical & Surgical Center. 2014; 9 (1): 23-30. [in Russ].

15. Honge JL, Funder JA, Pedersen TB, Kronborg MB, Hasenkam JM. Degenerative processes in bioprosthetic mitral valves in juvenile pigs. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011; 6: 72. doi: 10.1186/1749-8090-6-72.