Introduction: There are no guidelines regarding the use of bovine pericardial or porcine valves for aortic valve replacement, and prior studies have yielded conflicting results. The current study sought to compare short- and long-term outcomes in propensity-matched cohorts of patients undergoing isolated AVR with bovine versus porcine valves. Methods: This was a retrospective study utilizing an institutional database of all isolated bioprosthetic surgical aortic valve replacements performed at our center from 2010 to 2020. Patients were stratified according to type of bioprosthetic valve (bovine pericardial or porcine), and 1:1 propensity-score matching was applied. Kaplan-Meier survival estimation and multivariable Cox regression for mortality were performed. Cumulative incidence functions were generated for all-cause readmissions and aortic valve reinterventions. Results: A total of 1,502 patients were identified, 1,090 (72.6%) of whom received a bovine prosthesis and 412 (27.4%) of whom received a porcine prosthesis. Propensity-score matching resulted in 412 risk-adjusted pairs. There were no significant differences in clinical or echocardiographic postoperative outcomes in the matched cohorts. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were comparable, and, on multivariable Cox regression, valve type was not significantly associated with long-term mortality (HR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.74, 1.40, p=0.924). Additionally, there were no significant differences in competing-risk cumulative incidence estimates for all-cause readmissions (p=0.68) or aortic valve reinterventions (p=0.25) in the matched cohorts. Conclusion: The use of either bovine or porcine bioprosthetic aortic valves yields comparable postoperative outcomes, long-term survival, freedom from reintervention, and freedom from readmission.

Background: While prior data have suggested worse outcomes in women after acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) repair when compared to men, results have been inconsistent across studies over time. This study sought to evaluate the impact of sex on short- and long-term outcomes after ATAAD repair. Methods: This was a retrospective study utilizing an institutional database of ATAAD repairs from 2007 to 2021. Patients were stratified according to sex. Kaplan-Meier survival estimation and multivariable Cox regression were performed. Supplementary analysis using propensity score matching was also performed. Results: Of the 601 patients who underwent ATAAD repair, 361 were males (60.1%) and 240 (39.9%) were females. Females were significantly older, more likely to have hypertension, and more likely to have chronic lung disease. Females were also significantly more likely than males to undergo hemiarch replacement, while males were significantly more likely than females to undergo total arch replacement and frozen elephant trunk. Operative mortality was 9.4% among males and 13.8% among females, though this was not a statistically significant difference (p=0.098). Postoperative complications were comparable between groups. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were similar for men and women, and, on multivariable Cox regression, sex was not significantly associated with long-term survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.73, 1.37, p=0.986). Outcomes remained comparable after supplementary propensity score matched analysis. Conclusion: ATAAD repair can be performed with comparable short-term and long-term outcomes in both men and women.