Long-term outcome after biologic versus mechanical aortic valve replacement in 841 patients

Peterseim, David S.; Cen, Ye-Ying; Cheruvu, Srinivas; Landolfo, Kevin P.; Bashore, Thomas M.; Lowe, James E.; Wolfe, Walter G.; Glower, Donald D.

doi:10.1016/s0022-5223(99)70368-5

Cited by 105 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…11,12 Outcomes should improve progressively with recent gains in surgical methodology and prostheses. Hemodynamic profiles and event-free survival with current artificial mechanical prostheses have been impressive 13 ; increasing survival of newer bioprostheses 13,14 (15 to 20 event-free years now is common) enables use in progressively younger patients to minimize hemorrhagic and thromboembolic sequelae. Thus, operation in patients with congestive symptoms or exercise intolerance is well justified.…”

Section: Indications For Valve Surgery the Symptomatic Patientmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contemporary Approach to Aortic and Mitral Regurgitation

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Indications For Valve Surgery the Symptomatic Patientmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contemporary Approach to Aortic and Mitral Regurgitation

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It has been widely implemented since it gives a good long term outcomes and low risk of perioperative mortality and morbidity. (1,2) There are two types of valve that are commonly used in aortic valve replacement, which are mechanical valve and bio prosthetic valve. (3,4) Mechanical valve is well known for its long term durability but the disadvantage of its use includes risk of thrombogenic event necessitating lifelong anticoagulant.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early postoperative hemodynamics and clinical outcomes of patients receiving freedom solo aortic calve replacement; the Asian Experience

Amir¹,

Hassan²,

Mokhtar³

et al. 2013

ejcm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryAim: Background and aim of the study: Freedom SOLO (FS) valve (Sorin Group, Saluggia, Italy) is a stentless aortic valve bioprosthesis that use a single running suture line implanted in supra-annular position. Current study aims to assess the early postoperative hemodynamics and clinical outcomes of patients receiving FS aortic valve replacement (AVR).Methodology: 4 patients (2 male; 2 female; mean age 49.25 ± 23.78 years; range: from 25 to 73) who underwent AVR with FS valve in a single center were enrolled in the study. 2 patients underwent AVR for aortic stenosis and 2 patients for aortic regurgitation. Clinical and biological outcomes were recorded. Echocardiographic parameters were compared between preoperative and 5 months postoperative observation.Results: There was no early mortality reported. Late death was reported in one patient which was non valve related. There were 2 patients who developed early postoperative complication but it was not attributed to the valve itself. The mean transvalvular pressure gradient was 26.50 ± 11.90 mmHg preoperatively and 15.25 ± 10.11 mmHg postoperatively. The mean aortic valve area (AVA) for patients having stenosis improved from 0.74 ± 0.23 cm2 preoperatively to 1.50 ± 0.57 cm2 postoperatively. Preoperatively, the mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 65.75 ± 6.29 % and postoperatively 61.25+_11.84 %. The mean cross-clamp time (CCT) for isolated valve replacement was 80.5 ± 21.92 minutes and 147.00 ± 26.87 minutes. The mean lowest postoperative platelet count recorded was 24.50 ± 6.19 (x109/L). The mean platelet count at discharge was 128.75 ±10.11 (x109/L). Conclusion:The result demonstrated good short-term clinical and hemodynamic outcomes in patients underwent FS aortic valve replacement. However, the study also showed the occurrence of severe thrombocytopenia after FS valve implantation.Keywords: freedom solo valve, thrombocytopenia, aortic valve replacement

show abstract

“…The aim of this study was to establish whether there are variables in the hospital phase that could influence the choice of prosthesis (apart from those that are clearly established and discussed in the literature regarding decision-making in advanced stages of diseases [7][8][9][10] patients contained all of the variables that the researchers intended to study. From the 200 consecutive patients receiving a valve replacement using bovine pericardial biological prostheses, which were included in the team's database, 20 patients were randomly selected.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Troca valvar aórtica com diferentes próteses: existem diferenças nos resultados da fase hospitalar?

Feguri

Macruz

Bulhões³

et al. 2008

Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To analyze intraoperative data and possible differences in clinical evolution during postoperative hospital phase for aortic valve replacement surgery using different types of prosthesis.Methods: Analysis of 60 patients divided into three groups. Valve replacement with bioprosthesis (20), mechanical prosthesis (20) and homologous valve (20). The mean age was 51.1, 60% were male and 40% female patients; 86.7 % were in NYHA II or III; 63.3% presented arterial hypertension and 18.3% had diabetes. Aetiology of valve disease was degenerative for 39%, rheumatic for 36% and endocardits for 15%.Results: The hospital mortality was 5%; there were no differences in the incidence of septical or cardiogenic shock, acute renal failure, rhythms disorders during surgery or intensive care, neither for total time in intensive care and mechanical ventilation. However, there was statistical differences as regards the cardiopulmonary bypass total time (P=0.02) and the aortic clamping time (P<0.0001) unfavorable to homograft valve group. The ward admission time was greater for mechanical valve group (P=0.05) as well as for total admission time, but without statistical significance. It was observed that patients with preoperative hematocrit smaller than 38.1% used 2.73 units of blood components, and with postoperative hematocrit smaller than 32% used 1,79 units of blood components. Echocardiography control showed minimal evolutional differences. Conclusion 535FEGURI, GR ET AL -Aortic valve replacement with different types of prosthesis. Are there differences in the outcomes during hospital phase? Bras Cir Cardiovasc 2008; 23(4): 534-541 Rev

show abstract

Long-term outcome after biologic versus mechanical aortic valve replacement in 841 patients

Cited by 105 publications

References 22 publications

Contemporary Approach to Aortic and Mitral Regurgitation

Contemporary Approach to Aortic and Mitral Regurgitation

Early postoperative hemodynamics and clinical outcomes of patients receiving freedom solo aortic calve replacement; the Asian Experience

Troca valvar aórtica com diferentes próteses: existem diferenças nos resultados da fase hospitalar?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About