Bioprothetic Valve Versus Mechanical Valve of Bioprothetic Valve Versus Mechanical Valve

NCT ID: NCT06041308

Last Updated: 2024-10-18

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

RECRUITING

Total Enrollment

30000 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2021-03-16

Study Completion Date

2025-12-01

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

In this study, the investigators aim to use data identified through the hospital's integrated medical database and National Health Insurance database to explore the long-term performance and benefits of biological and mechanical valves. This research aims to provide more recommendations and references for valve replacement in different patient populations.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Long-term follow-up of valve surgery is essential in all cardiac surgeries and is the most commonly discussed indicator. The choice of valves has evolved over the past 30 years, offering two options: biological valves and mechanical valves. Biological valves have seen advancements in the last 15 years, including new processes and improved valve preservation methods. The question of whether these new process valves offer better long-term effectiveness has become a hot research topic in recent years.

Mechanical valves have a longer lifespan, but the need for long-term anticoagulant use to prevent mechanical valve thrombosis has raised concerns about anticoagulant side effects, abnormal clotting function, and bleeding. Biological valves, on the other hand, do not require long-term anticoagulation and only necessitate 2-3 months of anticoagulant treatment. However, the risk of biological valve degeneration results in an average lifespan of 10 to 20 years, which cannot match the durability of mechanical valves. This is the drawback of using biological valves.

Therefore, the investigators hope to utilize the hospital's integrated medical database and the long-term National Health Insurance database for tracking. The investigators aim to observe valve performance in different patient groups, such as young people, the elderly, patients on dialysis, those with rheumatic autoimmune diseases, and those taking specific medications, among others.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Valve Heart Disease

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

COHORT

Study Time Perspective

RETROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Bioprothetic valve

Groups undergoing cardiac valve surgery with bioprothetic valve.

valve

Intervention Type OTHER

bioprothetic valve versus mechanical valve

Mechanical valve

Groups undergoing cardiac valve surgery with mechanical valves.

valve

Intervention Type OTHER

bioprothetic valve versus mechanical valve

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

valve

bioprothetic valve versus mechanical valve

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

\-

Exclusion Criteria

\-
Maximum Eligible Age

20 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

National Taiwan University Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Nai-Hsin Chi

Role: STUDY_CHAIR

attending physician

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

National Taiwan University Hospital

Taipei, , Taiwan

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Taiwan

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Nai-Hsin Chi

Role: CONTACT

886-2-23123456 ext. 265081

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Nai-Hsin Chi, M.D./Ph.D.

Role: primary

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Takei Y, Chou NK, Wei LY, Fu HY, Yu HY, Chi NH. Robotic transmitral approach in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Int J Surg. 2024 Nov 1;110(11):7391-7394. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001934. No abstract available.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 38995189 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

202012072RIND

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.