Retrospective clinical analysis of stented vs. stentless porcine aortic bioprostheses q
|
|
- Jayson Martin
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery 18 (2000) 46±53 Retrospective clinical analysis of stented vs. stentless porcine aortic bioprostheses q Mario Vrandecic*, Fernando Antonio Fantini, Bayard Gontijo Filho, Ozanan CeÂsar de Oliveira, Idail Martins da Costa JuÂnior, Erika Vrandecic Biocor Institute, Avenida Alameda da Serra, 217, Bairro Vila da Serra, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais , Brazil Received 6 September 1999; received in revised form 15 February 2000; accepted 21 February 2000 Abstract Objective: The study was designed to compare hemodynamic performance, structural failure and survival of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) with a composite aortic stented or stentless porcine bioprosthesis. Methods: From January 1990 to June 1999, the clinical data of 725 patients undergoing AVR with stented porcine aortic bioprosthesis were reviewed. We de ned two groups of patients with similar clinical characteristics: 202 patients receiving aortic stented and 205 patients stentless valves. The two patients groups were similar in age, sex, valve lesion, valve size, preoperative New York Heart Association (NYHA) class status and follow-up. Results: The number of patients available for follow-up, excluding hospital and late mortality, reoperations and patients lost to follow-up, was 157 for the stented and 175 for the stentless group. There was a higher incidence of rheumatic heart disease in the stented (59%) vs. stentless group (44%), (P ˆ 0:003). Fewer patients had prior aortic bioprosthetic dysfunction in the stented (7.6%) compared to the stentless group (25%) (P, 0:001). The mean intensive care unit stay, hospital mortality and late mortality were similar (P, NS). The total complication rate was higher in the stented (12%) than the stentless (3.4%)(P ˆ 0:005). Valve related death was higher in the stented (2.5%) than the stentless (0%) (P ˆ 0:049). Postoperatively, the aortic effective ori ce area (AEOA) was larger (P, 0:001) and the transvalvular peak and mean gradients were lower in the stentless group (P, 0:001). The lea et tissue degeneration analysis was 8.0% in patients at risk for stented and 0.6% for stentless (P ˆ 0:001). Actuarial analysis disclosed no statistical difference in patient survival between groups (P ˆ 0:18). Reoperations were less frequent in the stentless group (P ˆ 0:010). Conclusions: Hemodynamic bene ts in the stentless group were evident and expressed by larger AEOA, lower gradients, better left ventricular remodeling with signi cant decrease of the left ventricular mass. Lower complication rates, lower reoperation rates, less lea et tissue degeneration, and lower valve related mortality rates were seen in the stentless group. A controlled clinical comparison trial with longer follow-up will be required to con rm these clinical and hemodynamic bene ts. q 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Porcine aortic stented bioprosthesis; Stentless aortic heart valve; Heterologous tissue heart valve; Tissue heart valve substitutes 1. Introduction After the successful experimental work of Morsch, Duran and Gunning in 1964, Jean Paul Binet in Paris implanted the rst porcine bioprosthesis in man [1]. Since then the use of aortic porcine bioprosthesis has provided patients with an excellent quality of life with low risk of major thromboembolic events and freedom from anticoagulant-related hemorrhage. An important drawbacks to the use of bioprosthesis have been the level or degree of structural tissue degeneration (STD) which has primarily been related to patient's age [2±4]. The clinical results with the use of porcine stented q Presented at the 13th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, September 5±8, * Corresponding author. Tel.: ; fax: address: biocor@biocor.com.br (M. Vrandecic). bioprosthesis have shown satisfactory results as far as hemodynamics performance and limited durability [5]. A comparison with mechanical valves has also shown favorable results with respect to freedom from all valves-related adverse effects at 10 years in patients 60 years of age and older [6]. Efforts to produce a longer-lasting tissue valve, for use in young patients, has spurred research to identify the causes of STD, such as the use of aldehyde [7,8] and, more recently, collagen tissue fatigue as an important cause of STD pointed out by Vyavhare [9]. Since tissue stress is an important determinant of valve failure, the absence of the valve stent may improve heterologous valve durability. This concept that gave origin to the stentless design late in 1988, with major clinical application beginning in 1990 for the Biocor± SJM aortic porcine stentless valve /00/$ - see front matter q 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S (00)
2 M. Vrandecic et al. / European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery 18 (2000) 46±53 47 The present study was designed as to determine and compare the hemodynamic performance, structural tissue degeneration and survival in patients undergoing AVR over the same time period, with the use of stented or stentless valves at the same institution. 2. Patients and methods 2.1. Tissue heart valves The heterologous valves used in this study were manufactured by Biocor InduÂstria e Pesquisas Ltda, since 1979, in Belo Horizonte, Brazil. In 1996 Biocor was acquired by St. Jude Medical, Inc., St. Paul, MN. The company continues to provide tissue heart valve substitutes with the following characteristics: fresh tissue harvesting, tissue selection and individual cuspal tanning by balanced salt and aldehyde solution and processing without pressure during xation. Composite mounting of selected porcine cusps into an anatomical exible stent, (provided with bovine pericardial bias tape at the out ow edge to avoid tissue contact with the polyester stent covering), and individual valve testing with pulse duplicator. The stentless model is composed of three selected aortic porcine cusps, attached to the inner aspect of a scalloped shape bovine pericardial tube, with anatomical similarity to the native aortic valve. This design provides improved effective ori ce area (AEOA), since the sewing ring and stent (part of the stented) no longer exists in the stentless model (Fig. 1) Patients From January 1990 to June 1999, 205 patients received porcine aortic stentless bioprosthesis implantations at our institution. During the same time period, 725 patients underwent AVR with porcine aortic stented bioprosthesis. Since these groups were not identical in relation to age and other clinical variables, a computer model was design to select, from these 725 patients, those with ages ranging between 30 and 79 years, which was the age range of the stentless group. The next step that the computer model performed was to select those with similar implant dates, accepting those operated within 3 months of the stentless patients. At the Fig. 1. Biocor±SJM tissue valves used were of composite design. end of this analysis 202 patients were selected in the stented group, which were similar to the 205 stentless patients. An analysis of these two groups disclosed no statistical difference of the chosen preoperative variables such as sex, valve lesion, NYHA functional class, and bioprosthesis diameter as shown in Table 1. The mean age was 48.1 ^ 17.4 years for the stented and 46.1 ^ 16.4 years for the stentless (P ˆ 0:23). There were 129 patients (64%) of male gender for the stented group and 148 patients (72%) for the stentless (P ˆ 0:09). The comparison between preoperative functional NYHA class in both groups showed similar data (P ˆ 0:80). The type of valve lesion and the bioprosthesis diameter were also equivalent in both groups (respectively, P ˆ 0:20 and P ˆ 0:48). The most frequently used valve sizes were 25 mm or smaller in both groups (71% for the stented and 73% for the stentless). Sizes: 19±21 mm represented 8.6% for the stented vs. 12% in the stentless (P ˆ 0:27). The follow-up ranged from 3 to 114 months with a mean of 53 months (4.4 ^ 1.8 years) for the stented patients and 55 months (4.6 ^ 1.5 years) for the stentless patients (P ˆ 0:22). The total patient follow-up was 693 patients-years for the stented group and 801 patient-years for the stentless group. Table 2 shows the differences related to etiology and associated procedures between both groups. The assessment of the preoperative data disclosed a higher incidence of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) (59%) in the stented compared to the stentless group (44%)(P ˆ 0:003). Fewer Table 1 Preoperative comparative patient pro le of both groups Stented (n ˆ 202) mean ^ SD n (%) Stentless (n ˆ 205) mean ^ SD n (%) P-value Patient pro le Age (30±79 years) 48.1 ^ ^ Gender Male 129 (64) 148 (72) 0.09 Female 73 (36) 57 (28) Valve lesion Insuf ciency 77 (38) 96 (47) Stenosis 87 (43) 75 (36) 0.20 Mixed lesion 38 (19) 34 (17) NYHA preoperative functional class I±II 50 (25) 45 (22) III 97 (48) 102 (50) 0.80 IV 55 (27) 58 (28) Bioprosthesis diameter 19 0 (0.0) 2 (1.0) (8.6) 23 (11) (28) 64 (31) (35) 60 (29) (23) 49 (24) (5.0) 7 (3.5)
3 48 M. Vrandecic et al. / European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery 18 (2000) 46±53 Table 2 Etiology and associated procedures Stented (n ˆ 202) n (%) Stentless (n ˆ 205) n (%) P-value Etiology Rheumatic HD 119 (59) 91 (44) Senile aortic degeneration 34 (17) 12 (6.0) Endocarditis 7 (3.4) 11 (5.5) 0.49 Congenital 14 (6.8) 26 (12) 0.07 Aortic bioprosthesis dysfunction 15 (7.6) 51 (25), Other 13 (6.7) 14 (6.8) 0.97 Associated procedures n ˆ 88 (43.5%) n ˆ 40 (19.5%) Mitral valve replacement 37 (18) 23 (11) 0.06 Myocardial revascularization 30 (15) 9 (4.4) Mitral valvuloplasty 10 (5.0) 7 (3.4) 0.60 Other 11 (5.4) 1 (0.5) None 114 (56) 165 (80), patients with aortic bioprosthetic dysfunction were operated on in the stented (7.6%) than in the stentless group (25%) (P, 0:001), because of our preference to use a stentless valve in patients requiring second tissue valve. Higher incidence of associated procedures seen in the stented group may be explained because of the need for longer cardiopulmonary bypass time for the stentless group. The following parameters were comparable: endocarditis (3.4%) on the stented group and (5.5%) for the stentless (P ˆ 0:49). Preoperatively, 19 (9.2%) of the stented patients and 17 (8.2%) of the stentless were in atrial brillation (P ˆ 0:82). Data collected included cardiopulmonary bypass, intensive care unit stay and hospital stay. Total and partial cardiopulmonary bypass time was compared between patient groups with and without associated procedures. Analysis of the echocardiographic data compared the following parameters: Left ventricular function: ejection fraction (LVEF), end systolic volume (LVESV), interventricular septal thickness (IST), posterior wall left ventricular thickness (PWLVT), LV mass (LVM), aortic effective ori ce area (AEOA), transvalvular peak and mean gradients (TPG± TMG), aortic competence (AC) and aortic lea et tissue degeneration (ALTD) De nitions We followed the guidelines of Edmunds [10] for the de nitions of morbidity and mortality in heart valve replacement. The incidence of thromboembolism was assessed according to the standard `proposal for reporting thrombosis, embolism and bleeding after heart valve replacement' by Bodnar and collaborators Echocardiographic assessment The echocardiographic analysis was done before surgery, 1 month after hospital discharge and yearly thereafter. Two senior sonographers were responsible for the nal reading of the echocardiography data. The revision and analysis of the echo ndings was performed periodically and at the end of the study closing, no major differences were found. The ATL±HDI 3000 with a 2±3-MHz transducer was used. M- mode and 2-dimensional echocardiography. Both M-mode recordings and of ine measurements were guided by the 2- dimensional image. M-mode measurements were made according to the recommendations of the American Society of Echocardiography. The ejection fraction was calculated according to Teichholz and associates and the LV mass by means of the cube formula [11]. Doppler measurements. Blood ow velocity in the LV out ow tract was estimated by pulsed wave Doppler from an apical 4-chamber view. Peak velocities during systole and diastole were measured. Continuous wave Doppler signals were recorded from multiple windows by a 2±3-MHz probe. Pressure gradients were calculated according to the simpli ed Bernoulli equation (Doppler pressure gradient ˆ 4 [peak velocity 2 ]). The mean gradients were calculated from off-line planimetry of the continuous wave Doppler recordings. The effective ori ce area was calculated according to the integral method [12]. Tissue degeneration analysis assessed by echocardiography followed standard parameters using M-mode, 2-dimensional and color Doppler and were graded as mild, moderate and severe. The overall valve function was assessed including effective ori ce area, lea et morbidity, valve gradient and valve competency. Lea et thickness, extent of brous degeneration, lea et refringency and calci cation (acoustic shadow) were all taken into consideration for the analysis. Mild degeneration was considerate when lea et thickness measured between 3 and 4 mm. Fibrosis involved one third of the lea et with less functional activity. Refringency compared the `white' color to the gray echo color scale. Moderate and severe structural failure was considerate when higher degree of alterations were encountered Statistical analysis Statistical analysis was done on extracted data from les formatted for the statistical analysis system with the Epi
4 M. Vrandecic et al. / European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery 18 (2000) 46±53 49 Info Software version 6.04b ± Center for Disease Control, Atlanta, GA [13]. Signi cance between means was determined using the unpaired t-test. The comparison between proportions was employed the chi square test and, when necessary, Fisher's exact test. The Kaplan±Meier life table technique was used to provide actuarial estimates [14]. The log rank test for independent groups was used to test the signi cance of differences. A P-value of,0.05 was considered signi cant. 3. Results Fig. 2. Hospital mortality. The mean intensive care unit stay was 2.5 days for the stented group and 2.6 days for the stentless group (P ˆ 0:50). The total hospital stay for the stented group was 9.2 days and 11.0 days for the stentless group (P ˆ 0:004). The stentless group with an isolated valve procedure had a longer hospital stay compared to stented group (11.2±9.9 days, P, 0:001). When other surgical procedures were performed, the same tendency was noted (11.0±8.7 days, P ˆ 0:022). The hospital mortality was 11 patient deaths for the stented (5.4%) and nine for the stentless (4.4%), with P ˆ 0:79 (Fig. 2). There was no statistical difference in hospital mortality between groups, with or without associated procedures. Forty-four percent of the stented patients and 20% of the stentless group had associated surgical procedures (P, 0:001). Table 3 shows the cardiopulmonary bypass times: a mean of 86.3 min for the stented group and 99.9 min for the stentless group, (P, 0:001). The aortic cross clamping time was 65.0 min for the stented and 80.9 min for the stentless group (P, 0:001). Although a longer extra corporeal time was needed for the stentless patients this did not affect the nal outcome. The follow-up ranged from three months to 114 months with a mean of 53 months (4.4 ^ 1.8 years) for the stented patients and 55 months (4.6 ^ 1.5 years) for the stentless patients (P ˆ 0:22). The total patient follow-up was 693 patient-years for the stented group and 801 patient-years for the stentless group. Late mortality was represented by 16 (8.4%) patient deaths for the stented and 14 (7.1%) for the stentless. There was no statistical difference between both groups when considering cardiac and no-cardiac death (P ˆ 1:00) (Fig. 3). Among 16 late death in the stented group, ve were of cardiac origin (two patients with acute myocardial infarction and three with progressive heart failure). The remaining deaths were not cardiac-related. Among 14 late deaths in the stentless group, four were of cardiac origin (one due to ventricular arrhythmia, one of acute myocardial infarction, Table 3 Cardiopulmonary bypass time ± hospital stay Stented mean ^ SD Stentless mean ^ SD P-value CPB-time (min) Without associated procedure 69.5 ^ ^ 26.4, With associated procedure ^ ^ All patients 86.3 ^ ^ 28.8, CCT (min) Without associated procedure 51.5 ^ ^ 23.4, With associated procedure 81.7 ^ ^ All patients 65.0 ^ ^ 25.2, Intensive care unit stay (days) Without associated procedure 2.4 ^ ^ With associated procedure 2.6 ^ ^ All patients 2.5 ^ ^ Total hospital stay (days) Without associated procedure 8.7 ^ ^ 7.5, With associated procedure 9.9 ^ ^ All patients 9.2 ^ ^
5 50 M. Vrandecic et al. / European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery 18 (2000) 46±53 Fig. 3. Late mortality in both groups broken down into cardiac and noncardiac causes. one of AV block and one with progressive heart failure). The other ten late deaths were not cardiac related. The actuarial analysis (excluded hospital mortality and reoperations) disclosed no statistical difference in patient survival between both groups with P ˆ 0:18, as shown in Fig. 4. The number of patients available for follow-up, excluding hospital and late mortality, reoperations and patients lost to follow-up, was 157 patients in the stented and 175 patients for the stentless group. Although there were three reoperations on the stentless group, it is worth noting the fact that two reoperations were due to paravalvular leaks in the stentless group, with only one replaced. One other valve with partial inferior suture dehiscence was repaired. There were eight reoperations in stented group. The actuarial analysis regarding freedom from all reoperations shows that they were less frequent on the stentless group (P ˆ 0:010) (Fig. 5). The following adverse effects were found: structural failure 1.3% for the stented and 0.0% for the stentless group (P ˆ 0:22), paravalvular leak in 1.3% for the stented and 1.1% for the stentless group (P ˆ 1:00), endocarditis 2.5% for the stented and 0.6% for the stentless group (P ˆ 0:19), thromboembolism 1.9% for the stented and 0.0% for the stentless group (P ˆ 0:10). All adverse effects were 12% for the stented and 3.4% for the stentless group (P ˆ 0:005). Valve related mortality was 2.5% for the stented and 0.0% for the stentless group (P ˆ 0:049) (Table 4). There were fewer patients in atrial brillation in both groups at the end of this follow-up, when compared with initial data: preoperatively, 19 (9.2%) of the stented patients were in atrial brillation and 17 (8.2%) of the stentless patients (P ˆ 0:82). At the end of this follow-up, there were eight patients (5.0%) for stented and ve patients (3.0%) for stentless (P ˆ 0:44). The comparison of the echocardiographic data showed statistical equivalence in the following variables: LVEF, LVESV, IST, PWLVT, aortic regurgitation and stenosis. The regression between preoperative and postoperative LV mass index had the P, 0:001, in the stented and stentless groups, independently. The AEOA was larger (P, 0:001) and TPG, TMG were lower in the stentless group (P, 0:001) (Table 5). The lea et tissue degeneration analysis disclosed 13 patients were at risk (8.0%) in the stented and one patient (0.6%) in the stentless (P ˆ 0:001) (Fig. 6). Both groups were equivalent when compared postoperative functional NYHA class, (P ˆ 0:39) (Table 6). 4. Discussion Ever since Ross [15] rst implanted a human homograft in the aortic position, similar efforts have continued to the present with favorable clinical results [16,17]. Higher demand and limited supplies triggered the current availability of aortic homografts in a stentless design. Over the last decade there has been consistently reports of hemodynamics bene ts with stentless valves, such as lower gradients and effective postoperative LV mass index reduction [18,19]. The Biocor±SJM porcine aortic stentless valve is a composite (three selected porcine aortic cusps) with conical design allowing a good t for most aortic pathologies. The use of stentless valves (when homograft is not available) is generally accepted even in patients with aortic valve endocarditis Fig. 4. Actuarial survival between stented and stentless groups.
6 M. Vrandecic et al. / European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery 18 (2000) 46±53 51 Fig. 5. Actuarial freedom from reoperations between the stented and stentless groups. [20]. The aortic stentless valve usage may be contraindicated when the surgeon is unfamiliar with the technique, when concomitant ascending aortic diseases exists or when the duration of aortic cross clamping is of concern. The present study compares the clinical outcomes of two patient groups undergoing AVR during the same time period and with similar relevant preoperative clinical characteristics. The fact that both valves were manufactured by the same rm, made with composite porcine aortic valves, and processed without pressure xation, allows a good comparison of clinical outcomes with these two different valve designs. The nature of this retrospective study raises questions about differences between the groups. Among these is the fact that there were relatively more preoperative patients with rheumatic heart disease in the stented group. This re ects our ongoing preference for stentless valves in patients with a failed stented bioprosthesis. This criteria is also re ected by the increased number of reoperations required because of bioprosthetic dysfunction in the stentless group. It should be emphasized that at a referral center such as ours, patients with degenerated bioprosthesis had valves made by several manufacturers. It is well known that durability between manufacturers is not uniform, and this may explain the higher number of cases with prosthetic dysfunction encountered in this study. Rheumatic heart disease recurrence is rarely seen in patient with aortic valve disease at 50 years of age. In mitral valve and in a Table 4 Long-term complications Complications Stented (n ˆ 157) n (%) Stentless (n ˆ 175) n (%) P-value Thromboembolism 3 (1.9) 0 (0) 0.10 Endocarditis 4 (2.5) 1 (0.6) 0.19 Paravalvular leak 2 (1.3) 2 (1.1) 1.00 Structural failure 2 (1.3) 0 (0.0) 0.22 All complications 19 (12) 6 (3.4) Valve-related death 4 (2.5) 0 (0) younger age group, recurrence represents major problem. The same may be applicable to atrial brillation, which is more frequent in young patients with mitral valve involvement. There were a higher number of associated procedures, including mitral valve replacement and coronary revascularization, in the stented group. The longer extra-corporeal circulation time needed for the stentless valve placement limited the use of stentless valves in these patients. The hospital mortality was similar in both groups, including those with or without associated procedures. The slightly lower mortality encountered in the stentless group was acceptable with no speci c reason found on the analysis. Shorter hospital stay (2 days less) related to fewer hours of respiratory assistance, longer cardiopulmonary by-pass time, the same duration of ICU stay. This study has shown favorable valve hemodynamics and LV remodeling with a trend towards less tissue degeneration in the stentless group. Tissue calci cation reported in stentless valves is, in general, more prevalent in the aortic wall and less in the cusps. Since Biocor±SJM includes minimal amount of aortic wall in its design this may favor durability. The choice of an aortic bioprosthesis versus a mechanical valve should be individualized according to age, prospective survival, and the basis of patient's expected compliance with the anticoagulation regime [21,22]. Results obtained with the stentless Biocor±SJM valves are comparable or better to their stented counterparts at 10 and 13 years [6]. Both stented and stentless valves in this study showed good clinical performance. This retrospective comparative analysis looked at the similarities in patients' ages, valve lesions, and preoperative clinical functional class in both groups. The end point of this study was the comparison of the hemodynamic performance and structural tissue degeneration over approximately 10 years of follow-up. Several studies have shown excellent hemodynamics performance with this aortic stentless when compared to the stented valve similar to the results seen with homografts [23±25]. In this study, relevant data obtained by the postoperative echodoppler examination during follow-up included a larger effective ori ce area, lower transvalvular
7 52 M. Vrandecic et al. / European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery 18 (2000) 46±53 Table 5 Echodoppler data Echodoppler results Stented (n ˆ 157) mean ^ SD Stentless (n ˆ 175) mean ^ SD P-value Aortic effective ori ce area 1.4 ^ ^ 0.4, Transvalvular peak gradient 27.2 ^ ^ 10.6, Mean transvalvular gradient 14.8 ^ ^ 6.1, Preoperative left ventricular mass (g-m 2 ) 153 ^ ^ 24, Postoperative left ventricular mass (g-m 2 ) 129 ^ ^ gradients with the mean of 9 mmhg. It was noteworthy that more than 70% of this population required stented and stentless valves sizes 25 mm or smaller. Favorable postoperative LV mass regression was demonstrated in both groups with 30% lower LV mass index in the stentless patients. Aortic regurgitation was rare, trivial and non-progressive. Comparison of the second parameter, lea et tissue degeneration, was favorable in the stentless group with only one patient with mild lea et change versus 13 patients with mild or moderate degeneration in the stented group. Hemodynamic performance, long term LV remodeling and structural tissue failure were signi cantly better in the stentless patients. 5. Study limitations The present study was not prospectively randomized. This was a retrospective comparative analysis between two patient groups similar in speci cally chosen parameters, known to be determinants of valve durability (age, sex, valve lesion, valve size, preoperative NYHA class and follow-up). There were more patients with rheumatic heart diseases in the stented group and a higher incidence of bioprosthesis dysfunction indicating valve replacement in the stentless group. Although these limitations exist, both groups were comparable in the most clinically important parameters. The patient's relatively young age, long follow-up and use of a tissue valves with identical xation Table 6 Postoperative NYHA functional class NYHA Stented (n ˆ 165) n (%) Stentless (n ˆ 174) n (%) I±II 142 (86) 158 (91) III 13 (8.1) 9 (5.1) IV 10 (5.9) 7 (3.9) methods provides a relevant clinical comparison between the use of stented and stentless valves in the aortic position. 6. Conclusions Both the aortic porcine stented bioprosthesis and the aortic porcine stentless valves performed well during up to 10 years follow-up (mean of 4.4 years). Hemodynamic bene ts in the stentless group were evidenced by a larger aortic effective ori ce area, lower gradients, and better LV remodeling with signi cant decreased of the LV mass index. There was no structural tissue degeneration requiring reoperation in the stentless group. Lower complication rates, lower reoperation rates, and lower valve-related mortality rates were seen in the stentless group. Longer follow-up studies will be required to con rm continuing clinical and hemodynamic bene ts, continuing lack of tissue degeneration, and better quality of life with the use of the stentless bioprosthesis in the aortic position. Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge the statistical assistance of EugeÃnio Marcos Andrade Goulart, MD, who is responsible for the medical statistical of this Institute. References Fig. 6. Tissue lea et degeneration detected during echocardiographic examination. [1] Binet JP, Duran CG, Carpentier A, Langlois J. Heterologous aortic valve transplantation. Lancet 1965;2:1275. [2] Jamieson WRE, Munro AI, Miyagishima RT, Allen P, Burr LH, Tyers GFO. Carpentier-Edwards standard porcine bioprosthesis-clinical performance to seventeen years. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:999± [3] Fann JI, Miller DC, Moore KA, Mitchell RS, Oyer PE, Stinson EB, Robbins RC, Reitz BA, Shumway NE. Twenty-year clinical experi-
8 M. Vrandecic et al. / European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery 18 (2000) 46±53 53 ence with porcine bioprosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 1996;62:1301± [4] Burr LH, Jamieson WRE, Munro AI, Miyagishima RT, German E. Porcine bioprosthesis in the elderly: clinical performance by age groups and valve positions. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:S264±S269. [5] Vrandecic M, Gontijo Filho B, Paula e Silva JA, Fantini FA, Barbosa JT, SaÄo Jose MC, Dos Santos Pinto CA, Vieira GL, Oliveira HG, Rabelo S. Clinical results with the Biocor porcine bioprosthesis. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 1991;32(6):807±813. [6] Myken PS, Caidahl K, Larsson S, Berggren HE. 10-year experience with the Biocor porcine bioprosthesis in the aortic position. J Heart Valve Dis 1994;3(6):648±656. [7] Hilbert SL, Barrick MK, Ferrans VJ. Porcine aortic valve bioprosthesis: A morphologic comparison of the effects of xation pressure. J Biomed Mater Res 1990;24:773±787. [8] Flomenbaum MA, Schoen FJ. Effects of xation back pressure and antimineralization treatment on the morphology of porcine aortic bioprosthetic valves. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1993;105:154±164. [9] Vyavahare N, Ogle M, Schoen FJ, Zand R, Gloeckner DC, Sacks M, Levy RJ. Mechanisms of bioprosthetic heart valve failure: fatigue causes collagen structural denaturation and glycosaminoglycan loss. J Biomed Mater Res 1999;46:44±50. [10] Edmunds LHJ, Clark RE, Cohn LH, Miller DC, Weisel RD. Guidelines for reporting morbidity and mortality after cardiac valvular operations. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;96(3):351±353. [11] Teichholz LE, Kreulen T, Herman MV, Gorlin R. Problems in echocardiographic volume determinations: echocardiographic-angiographic correlations in the presence or absence of asynergy. Am J Cardiol 1976;37:7±11. [12] Skjaerpe T, Hegranaes L, Hatle L. Noninvasive estimation of valve area in patients with aortic stenosis by Doppler ultrasound and twodimensional echocardiography. Circulation 1985;72:810. [13] Dean AG, Dean JA, Coulombier D, Brendel KA, Smith DC, Burton AH, Dicker RC, Sullivan K, Fagan RF, Arner TG. Epi Info, Version 6: Word Processing, Database and Statistics Program for Epidemiology on microcomputers. Atlanta, GA: Centers of Disease Control and Preservation, [14] Campos Filho N, Franco EL. KMSURV ± A microcomputer program for univariate survival data analysis. Comp Meth Prog Biomed 1998;27:223±228. [15] Ross DN. Homograft replacement of the aortic valve. Lancet 1962;2:487±488. [16] Yacoub M, Rasmi NRH, Sundt TM, Lund O, Boyland E, Radley- Smith R, Khaghani A, Mitchell A. Fourteen-year experience with homovital homografts for aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995;110:186±194. [17] Kirklin JK, Smith D, Novick W, Naftel DC, Kirklin JW, Paci co AD, Nanda NC, Helmcke FR, Bourge RC. Long-term function of cryopreserved aortic homografts: a ten-year study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1993;106:154±166. [18] Christakis GT, Joyner CD, Morgan CD, Fremes SE, Buth KJ, Sever JY, Rao V, Panagiotopoulos KP, Murphy PM, Goldman BS. Left ventricular mass regression early after aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 1996;62:1084±1089. [19] Vrandecic MP, Gontijo BF. Biocor stentless aortic valve at 7 years. In: Huysmans HA, David TE, editors. Stentless bioprostheses, Isis Medical Media, pp. 53±58. [20] Gontijo FB, Vrandecic M, Fantini FA, Oliveira MH, Avelar SO. Porcine stentless aortic valve in replacements and acute aortic endocarditis. J Heart Valve Dis 1995;4:171±175. [21] Peterseim SD, Cen YY, Cheruvu S, Landolfo K, Bashore TM, Lowe JE, Wolfe WG, Glower DD. Long-term outcome after biologic versus mechanical aortic valve replacement in 841 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;117:890±897. [22] Beth-Hanssen O, Wallentin I, Larsson S, Caidahl K. Reference Doppler echocardiographic values for St. Jude Medical, Omnicarbon and Biocor prosthetic valves in the aortic position. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 1998;11:466±477. [23] Dellgren G, Erikson M, Brodin LA, Radegran K. The extended Biocor stentless aortic bioprosthesis. Early clinical experience. Scand Cardiovasc J 1999;33(5):259±264. [24] Jin XY, Gibson DG, Yacoub MH, Pepper RJ. Perioperative assessment of aortic homograft. Toronto stentless valve, and stented valve in the aortic position. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:S395±S401. [25] Doty DB, Flores JH, Millar RC. Aortic valve replacement with the Medtronic Freestyle bioprosthesis. Stentless Bioprosthesis 1999:93±101.
Reoperation for Bioprosthetic Mitral Structural Failure: Risk Assessment
Reoperation for Bioprosthetic Mitral Structural Failure: Risk Assessment W.R.E. Jamieson, MD; L.H. Burr, MD; R.T. Miyagishima, MD; M.T. Janusz, MD; G.J. Fradet, MD; S.V. Lichtenstein, MD; H. Ling, MD Background
More informationCarpentier-Edwards Pericardial Valve in the Aortic Position: 25-Years Experience
SURGERY: The Annals of Thoracic Surgery CME Program is located online at http://www.annalsthoracicsurgery.org/cme/ home. To take the CME activity related to this article, you must have either an STS member
More informationPorcine bioprosthesis use for surgical treatment of
Fifteen-Year Clinical Experience With the Biocor Porcine Bioprostheses in the Mitral Position Kaan Kırali, MD, Mustafa Güler, MD, Altuğ Tuncer, MD, Bahadır Dağlar, MD, Gökhan İpek, MD, Ömer Işık, MD, and
More informationEleven years experience with the Biocor stentless aortic bioprosthesis: clinical and hemodynamic follow-up with long-term relative survival rate
European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery 22 (2002) 912 921 www.elsevier.com/locate/ejcts Eleven years experience with the Biocor stentless aortic bioprosthesis: clinical and hemodynamic follow-up with
More informationLong-term results (22 years) of the Ross Operation a single institutional experience
Long-term results (22 years) of the Ross Operation a single institutional experience Authors: Costa FDA, Schnorr GM, Veloso M,Calixto A, Colatusso D, Balbi EM, Torres R, Ferreira ADA, Colatusso C Department
More informationPresenter Disclosure. Patrick O. Myers, M.D. No Relationships to Disclose
Presenter Disclosure Patrick O. Myers, M.D. No Relationships to Disclose Aortic Valve Repair by Cusp Extension for Rheumatic Aortic Insufficiency in Children Long term Results and Impact of Extension Material
More informationA 20-year experience of 1712 patients with the Biocor porcine bioprosthesis
Acquired Cardiovascular Disease Mykén and Bech-Hansen A 2-year experience of 1712 patients with the Biocor porcine bioprosthesis Pia S. U. Mykén, MD, PhD, a and Odd Bech-Hansen, MD, PhD b Objective: The
More informationHani K. Najm MD, Msc, FRCSC FACC, FESC President Saudi Society for Cardiac Surgeons Associate Professor of Cardiothoracic Surgery King Abdulaziz
Hani K. Najm MD, Msc, FRCSC FACC, FESC President Saudi Society for Cardiac Surgeons Associate Professor of Cardiothoracic Surgery King Abdulaziz Cardiac Centre Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Decision process for
More information15-Year Comparison of Supra-Annular Porcine and PERIMOUNT Aortic Bioprostheses
ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION 15-Year Comparison of Supra-Annular Porcine and PERIMOUNT Aortic Bioprostheses WR Eric Jamieson, MD, Eva Germann, MSc, Michel R Aupart, MD 1, Paul H Neville, MD 1, Michel A Marchand,
More informationHani K. Najm MD, Msc, FRCSC, FRCS (Glasgow), FACC, FESC President of Saudi Heart Association King Abdulaziz Cardiac Centre Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Hani K. Najm MD, Msc, FRCSC, FRCS (Glasgow), FACC, FESC President of Saudi Heart Association King Abdulaziz Cardiac Centre Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Decision process for Management of any valve Timing Feasibility
More informationThe St. Jude Medical Biocor Bioprosthesis
The St. Jude Medical Biocor Bioprosthesis Clinical Evidence of Long-term Durability Long-term Biocor Experience A Review and Comparative Assessment Long-term Biocor Stented Tissue Valve Studies Twenty-year
More information16 YEAR RESULTS Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT Mitral Pericardial Bioprosthesis, Model 6900
CLINICAL COMMUNIQUé 6 YEAR RESULTS Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT Mitral Pericardial Bioprosthesis, Model 69 The Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT Mitral Pericardial Valve, Model 69, was introduced into clinical
More informationClinical material and methods. Copyright by ICR Publishers 2003
Fourteen Years Experience with the CarboMedics Valve in Young Adults with Aortic Valve Disease Jan Aagaard 1, Jens Tingleff 2, Per V. Andersen 1, Christel N. Hansen 2 1 Department of Cardio-Thoracic and
More informationTSDA Boot Camp September 13-16, Introduction to Aortic Valve Surgery. George L. Hicks, Jr., MD
TSDA Boot Camp September 13-16, 2018 Introduction to Aortic Valve Surgery George L. Hicks, Jr., MD Aortic Valve Pathology and Treatment Valvular Aortic Stenosis in Adults Average Course (Post mortem data)
More informationManagement of Difficult Aortic Root, Old and New solutions
Management of Difficult Aortic Root, Old and New solutions Hani K. Najm MD, Msc, FRCSC,, FACC, FESC Chairman, Pediatric and Congenital Heart Surgery Cleveland Clinic Conflict of Interest None Difficult
More informationP have been used for mitral and aortic valve replacement
A -Year Comparison of Mitral Valve Replacement With Carpentier-Edwards and Hancock Porcine Bioprostheses P. Perier, MD, A. Deloche, MD, S. Chauvaud, MD, J. C. Chachques, MD, J. Relland, MD, J. N. Fabiani,
More informationTHE IMPACT OF AGE, CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE, AND CARDIAC COMORBIDITY ON LATE SURVIVAL AFTER BIOPROSTHETIC AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT
THE IMPACT OF AGE, CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE, AND CARDIAC COMORBIDITY ON LATE SURVIVAL AFTER BIOPROSTHETIC AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT Gideon Cohen, MD Tirone E. David, MD Joan Ivanov, MSc Sue Armstrong, MSc
More informationEight-Year Results of Aortic Root Replacement With the Freestyle Stentless Porcine Aortic Root Bioprosthesis
Eight-Year Results of Aortic Root Replacement With the Freestyle Stentless Porcine Aortic Root Bioprosthesis Neal D. Kon, MD,* Robert D. Riley, MD, Sandy M. Adair, RN, Dalane W. Kitzman, MD, and A. Robert
More informationComposite stentless valve with graft extension for combined replacement of the aortic valve, root and ascending aorta
European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery 20 (2001) 252±256 www.elsevier.com/locate/ejcts Composite stentless valve with graft extension for combined replacement of the aortic valve, root and ascending
More informationDoes Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch Affect Long-term Results after Mitral Valve Replacement?
Original Article Does Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch Affect Long-term Results after Mitral Valve Replacement? Hiroaki Sakamoto, MD, PhD, and Yasunori Watanabe, MD, PhD Background: Recently, some articles
More informationPrimary Tissue Valve Degeneration in Glutaraldehvde-Preserved Porcine Biomostheses: Hancock I Vekus Carpentier-Edwards at 4- to 7-Years Follow-up
Primary Tissue Valve Degeneration in Glutaraldehvde-Preserved Porcine Biomostheses: A Hancock I Vekus Edwards at 4- to 7-Years Follow-up Francisco Nistal, M.D., Edurne Artifiano, M.D., and Ignacio Gallo,
More informationExpanding Relevance of Aortic Valve Repair Is Earlier Operation Indicated?
Expanding Relevance of Aortic Valve Repair Is Earlier Operation Indicated? RM Suri, V Sharma, JA Dearani, HM Burkhart, RC Daly, LD Joyce, HV Schaff Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester,
More informationBioprostheses are prone to continuous degeneration
Twenty-Year Experience With the St. Jude Medical Biocor Bioprosthesis in the Aortic Position Walter B. Eichinger, MD, Ina M. Hettich, MD, Daniel J. Ruzicka, MD, Klaus Holper, MD, Carolin Schricker, Sabine
More informationCLINICAL COMMUNIQUE 16 YEAR RESULTS
CLINICAL COMMUNIQUE 6 YEAR RESULTS Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT Mitral Pericardial Bioprosthesis, Model 6900 Introduction The Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT Mitral Pericardial Valve, Model 6900, was introduced
More informationA Surgeon s Perspective Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Valvular Heart Disease Adapted from the 2006 ACC/AHA Guideline Revision
A Surgeon s Perspective Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Valvular Heart Disease Adapted from the 2006 ACC/AHA Guideline Revision Prof. Pino Fundarò, MD Niguarda Hospital Milan, Italy Introduction
More informationCarpentier-Edwards supra-annular aortic porcine bioprosthesis: Clinical performance over 20 years
Surgery for Acquired Cardiovascular Disease Carpentier-Edwards supra-annular aortic porcine bioprosthesis: Clinical performance over 20 years W. R. Eric Jamieson, MD, Lawrence H. Burr, MD, Robert T. Miyagishima,
More information(Ann Thorac Surg 2008;85:845 53)
I Made Adi Parmana The utility of intraoperative TEE has become increasingly more evident as anesthesiologists, cardiologists, and surgeons continue to appreciate its potential application as an invaluable
More informationT sors in the following aspects: the porcine aortic valve
Clinical and Hemodynamic Assessment of the Hancock I1 Bioprosthesis Tirone E. David, MD, Susan Armstrong, MSc, and Zhao Sun, MA Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, The Toronto Hospital and University of
More informationAdult Echocardiography Examination Content Outline
Adult Echocardiography Examination Content Outline (Outline Summary) # Domain Subdomain Percentage 1 2 3 4 5 Anatomy and Physiology Pathology Clinical Care and Safety Measurement Techniques, Maneuvers,
More informationThe Ross Procedure: Outcomes at 20 Years
The Ross Procedure: Outcomes at 20 Years Tirone David Carolyn David Anna Woo Cedric Manlhiot University of Toronto Conflict of Interest None The Ross Procedure 1990 to 2004 212 patients: 66% 34% Mean age:
More informationMedium-Term Determinants of Left Ventricular Mass Index After Stentless Aortic Valve Replacement
Medium-Term Determinants of Left Ventricular Mass Index After Stentless Aortic Valve Replacement Xu Y. Jin, MD, PhD, Ravi Pillai, FRCS, and Stephen Westaby, FRCS Department of Cardiac Surgery, Oxford Heart
More informationEarly and One-year Outcomes of Aortic Root Surgery in Marfan Syndrome Patients
Early and One-year Outcomes of Aortic Root Surgery in Marfan Syndrome Patients A Prospective, Multi-Center, Comparative Study Joseph S. Coselli, Irina V. Volguina, Scott A. LeMaire, Thoralf M. Sundt, Elizabeth
More informationValve prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) was first defined
Impact of Valve Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Short-Term Mortality After Aortic Valve Replacement Claudia Blais, BSc; Jean G. Dumesnil, MD; Richard Baillot, MD; Serge Simard, MS; Daniel Doyle, MD; Philippe
More informationExperience with 500 Stentless Aortic Valve Replacements
Experience with 500 Stentless Aortic Valve Replacements Dimitrios C. Iliopoulos, MD Cardiac Surgeon Ass. Professor of Surgery University of Athens, School of Medicine I declare no conflict of interest
More informationHemodynamics Benefit of Supra-Annular Design in Failed Bio-Prosthetic Valves
Hemodynamics Benefit of Supra-Annular Design in Failed Bio-Prosthetic Valves Speaker's name: I have the following potential conflicts of interest to report: Proctorship for Medtronic Agenda Failure modes
More informationDecellularization of Aortic Homografts: South American and European Current Experience
Department of Cardiac Surgery Instituto de Neurologia e Cardiologia de Curitiba (INC-Cardio) Decellularization of Aortic Homografts: South American and European Current Experience Francisco Diniz Affonso
More informationLONG-TERM OUTCOME AFTER BIOLOGIC VERSUS MECHANICAL AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT IN 841 PATIENTS
LONG-TERM OUTCOME AFTER BIOLOGIC VERSUS MECHANICAL AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT IN 841 PATIENTS David S. Peterseim, MD Ye-Ying Cen, MA Srinivas Cheruvu, MHS Kevin Landolfo, MD Thomas M. Bashore, MD James E.
More informationCoreValve in a Degenerative Surgical Valve
CoreValve in a Degenerative Surgical Valve Ran Kornowski, MD, FESC, FACC Chairman Department of Cardiology Rabin Medical Center, Petach Tikva, Israel Disclosure Statement of Financial Interest I, Ran Kornowski,
More informationAORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT WITH FREEHAND AUTOLOGOUS PERICARDIUM
AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT WITH FREEHAND AUTOLOGOUS PERICARDIUM Fifty-one patients with a mean age of 31.2 years underwent aortic valve replacement with glutaraldehyde-treated autologous pericardium. Pure
More information25 different brand names >44 different models Sizes mm
Types of Prosthetic Valves BIOLOGIC STENTED Porcine xenograft Pericardial xenograft STENTLESS Porcine xenograft Pericardial xenograft Homograft (allograft) Autograft PERCUTANEOUS MECHANICAL Bileaflet Single
More informationMedtronic Mosaic porcine bioprosthesis: Assessment of 12-year performance
Medtronic Mosaic porcine bioprosthesis: Assessment of 12-year performance W. R. Eric Jamieson, MD, a Friedrich-Christian Riess, MD, b Peter J. Raudkivi, MD, c Jacques Metras, MD, d Edward F. G. Busse,
More informationOutcomes of Mitral Valve Repair for Mitral Regurgitation Due to Degenerative Disease
Outcomes of Mitral Valve Repair for Mitral Regurgitation Due to Degenerative Disease TIRONE E. DAVID, MD ; SEMIN THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG 19:116-120c 2007 ELSEVIER INC. PRESENTED BY INTERN 許士盟 Mitral valve
More informationProf. Patrizio LANCELLOTTI, MD, PhD Heart Valve Clinic, University of Liège, CHU Sart Tilman, Liège, BELGIUM
The Patient with Aortic Stenosis and Mitral Regurgitation Prof. Patrizio LANCELLOTTI, MD, PhD Heart Valve Clinic, University of Liège, CHU Sart Tilman, Liège, BELGIUM Aortic Stenosis + Mitral Regurgitation?
More informationThe clinical experience reported in recent Western series has provided
Surgery for Acquired Cardiovascular Disease Yu et al Long-term evaluation of Carpentier-Edwards porcine bioprosthesis for rheumatic heart disease Hsi-Yu Yu, MD a Yi-Lwun Ho, MD b Shu-Hsun Chu, MD c Yih-Sharng
More informationBicuspid aortic root spared during ascending aorta surgery: an update of long-term results
Short Communication Bicuspid aortic root spared during ascending aorta surgery: an update of long-term results Marco Russo, Guglielmo Saitto, Paolo Nardi, Fabio Bertoldo, Carlo Bassano, Antonio Scafuri,
More informationRegression of Hypertrophy After Carpentier-Edwards Pericardial Aortic Valve Replacement
Regression of Hypertrophy After Carpentier-Edwards Pericardial Aortic Valve Replacement Steven S. Khan, MD, Robert J. Siegel, MD, Michele A. DeRobertis, RN, Carlos E. Blanche, MD, Robert M. Kass, MD, Wen
More informationEchocardiographic Evaluation of Mitral Valve Prostheses
Echocardiographic Evaluation of Mitral Valve Prostheses Dennis A. Tighe, M.D., FACC, FACP, FASE Cardiovascular Medicine University of Massachusetts Medical School Worcester, MA www.asecho.org 1 Nishimura
More informationPPM: How to fit a big valve in a small heart
PPM: How to fit a big valve in a small heart Hani K. Najm MD, Msc, FRCSC, FRCS (Glasgow), FACC, FESC King Abdulaziz Cardiac Centre National Guard Health Affairs Riyadh, Saudi Arabia GHA meeting Muscat
More informationHemodynamic Performance of the Medtronic Mosaic Porcine Bioprosthesis Up to Ten Years
Hemodynamic Performance of the Medtronic Mosaic Porcine Bioprosthesis Up to Ten Years Friedrich-Christian Riess, MD, Ralf Bader, MD, Eva Cramer, MD, Lorenz Hansen, MD, Bèr Kleijnen, MS, Gunther Wahl, MD,
More informationControversy exists regarding which valve type is best
Treatment of Endocarditis With Valve Replacement: The Question of Tissue Versus Mechanical Prosthesis Marc R. Moon, MD, D. Craig Miller, MD, Kathleen A. Moore, BS, Phillip E. Oyer, MD, PhD, R. Scott Mitchell,
More informationThe operative mortality rate after redo valvular operations
Clinical Outcomes of Redo Valvular Operations: A 20-Year Experience Naoto Fukunaga, MD, Yukikatsu Okada, MD, Yasunobu Konishi, MD, Takashi Murashita, MD, Mitsuru Yuzaki, MD, Yu Shomura, MD, Hiroshi Fujiwara,
More informationDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Heart and Lung Center, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
Long-Term Outcome of the Mitroflow Pericardial Bioprosthesis in the Elderly after Aortic Valve Replacement Johan Sjögren, Tomas Gudbjartsson, Lars I. Thulin Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Heart
More informationSurgery for Acquired Cardiovascular Disease
Performance of bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses assessed by composites of valve-related complications to 15 years after mitral valve replacement W. R. E. Jamieson, MD, O. von Lipinski, MD, R. T.
More informationIncidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch in patients receiving mitral Biocor porcine prosthetic valves
INTERVENTION/VALVULAR HEART DISEASE ORIGINAL ARTICLE Cardiology Journal 2016, Vol. 23, No. 2, 178 183 DOI: 10.5603/CJ.a2016.0011 Copyright 2016 Via Medica ISSN 1897 5593 Incidence of prosthesis-patient
More informationGeometric mismatch between homograft (allograft) and native aortic root: a 14-year clinical experience q
European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery 20 (2001) 835 841 www.elsevier.com/locate/ejcts Geometric mismatch between homograft (allograft) and native aortic root: a 14-year clinical experience q A.C.
More informationDurability of Pericardial Versus Porcine Aortic Valves
Journal of the American College of Cardiology Vol. 44, No. 2, 2004 2004 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation ISSN 0735-1097/04/$30.00 Published by Elsevier Inc. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2004.01.053
More information42yr Old Male with Severe AR Mild LV dysfunction s/p TOF -AV Replacement(tissue valve) or AoV plasty- Kyung-Hwan Kim
42yr Old Male with Severe AR Mild LV dysfunction s/p TOF -AV Replacement(tissue valve) or AoV plasty- Kyung-Hwan Kim Current Guideline for AR s/p TOF Surgery is reasonable in adults with prior repair of
More informationStentless aortic xenografts were introduced a decade
Survival After Stentless and Stented Xenograft Aortic Valve Replacement: A Concurrent, Controlled Trial Giovanni Battista Luciani, MD, Gianluca Casali, MD, Stefano Auriemma, MD, Francesco Santini, MD,
More informationRe-do aortic valve replacement after previous homograft aortic root replacement
Re-do aortic valve replacement after previous homograft aortic root replacement Jullien Gaer, Toufan Bahrami, Fabio de Robertis, Ahmed Abdulsalam, John Pepper, NHS Foundation Trust, UK Professor Sir Magdi
More informationMechanical vs. Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement: Time to Reconsider? Christian Shults, MD Cardiac Surgeon, Medstar Heart and Vascular Institute
Mechanical vs. Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement: Time to Reconsider? Christian Shults, MD Cardiac Surgeon, Medstar Heart and Vascular Institute Assistant Professor, Georgetown School of Medicine
More informationPROSTHETIC VALVE BOARD REVIEW
PROSTHETIC VALVE BOARD REVIEW The correct answer D This two chamber view shows a porcine mitral prosthesis with the typical appearance of the struts although the leaflets are not well seen. The valve
More informationTAVR: Echo Measurements Pre, Post And Intra Procedure
2017 ASE Florida, Orlando, FL October 10, 2017 8:00 8:25 AM 25 min TAVR: Echo Measurements Pre, Post And Intra Procedure Muhamed Sarić MD, PhD, MPA Director of Noninvasive Cardiology Echo Lab Associate
More informationThe Role Of Decellularized Valve Prostheses In The Young Patient
The Role Of Decellularized Valve Prostheses In The Young Patient Francisco Diniz Affonso da Costa Human Tissue Bank PUCPR - Brazil Disclosures Ownership and patent license of the SDS decellularization
More informationAortic valve replacement with the Sorin Pericarbon Freedom stentless prosthesis: 7 years experience in 130 patients
Aortic valve replacement with the Sorin Pericarbon Freedom stentless prosthesis: 7 years experience in 130 patients Augusto D Onofrio, MD, Stefano Auriemma, MD, Paolo Magagna, MD, Alessandro Favaro, MD,
More informationReconstruction of the intervalvular fibrous body during aortic and
Aortic and mitral valve replacement with reconstruction of the intervalvular fibrous body: An analysis of clinical outcomes Nilto C. De Oliveira, MD Tirone E. David, MD Susan Armstrong, MSc Joan Ivanov,
More informationFocused. se with 2008 F. lar Heart Diseas. date. ents With Valvul. Upd. gement of Patie. lines for Manag. HA 2006 Guidel ACC/AH. Fig.
ACC/AH HA 2006 Guidel nic severe AI (Fig. 4). ned by age, ay also be helpful nd echo. For AI, ollow up may be or MRI rather than mension; SD, end lines for Manag gement of Patie Upd ents With Valvul date
More informationVery Long-Term Survival Implications of Heart Valve Replacement With Tissue Versus Mechanical Prostheses in Adults <60 Years of Age
Very Long-Term Survival Implications of Heart Valve Replacement With Versus Prostheses in Adults
More informationCover Page. The handle holds various files of this Leiden University dissertation
Cover Page The handle http://hdl.handle.net/1887/28521 holds various files of this Leiden University dissertation Author: Katsanos, Spyridon Title: Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation Issue
More informationHeart Valves: Before and after surgery
Heart Valves: Before and after surgery Tim Sutton, Consultant Cardiologist Middlemore Hospital, Auckland Auckland Heart Group Indications for intervention in Valvular disease To prevent sudden death and
More informationEmergency Intraoperative Echocardiography
Emergency Intraoperative Echocardiography Justiaan Swanevelder Department of Anaesthesia, Glenfield Hospital University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, UK Carl Gustav Jung (1875-1961) Your vision will
More informationThe use of mitral valve (MV) repair to correct mitral
Outcomes and Long-Term Survival for Patients Undergoing Repair Versus Effect of Age and Concomitant Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Vinod H. Thourani, MD; William S. Weintraub, MD; Robert A. Guyton, MD;
More informationReoperations after primary aortic valve replacement
Third-Time Aortic Valve Replacement: Patient s and Operative Outcome Kasra Shaikhrezai, MD, MRCS, Giordano Tasca, MD, FETCS, Mohamed Amrani, PhD, FETCS, Gilles Dreyfus, MD, FETCS, and George Asimakopoulos,
More informationNearly 40 years after the pioneering efforts of Starr and
Prognosis After Aortic Valve Replacement With a Bioprosthesis Predictions Based on Meta-Analysis and Microsimulation J.P.A. Puvimanasinghe, MBBS, MSc, MD; E.W. Steyerberg, PhD; J.J.M. Takkenberg, MD; M.J.C.
More informationIn , three studies described patients
Heart 2001;85:337 341 VALVE DISEASE Should patients with asymptomatic mild or moderate aortic stenosis undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery also have valve replacement for their aortic stenosis? Shahbudin
More informationThe increasing number of elderly patients with complex
Valved Stentless Composite Graft: Clinical Outcomes and Hemodynamic Characteristics Paul P. Urbanski, MD, Anno Diegeler, MD, Alexander Siebel, MD, Michael Zacher, MD, and Robert W. Hacker, MD Herz- und
More informationRead at the Twenty-fourth Annual Meeting of The Western Thoracic Surgical Association, Whistler, British Columbia, June 24-27, 1998.
STRUCTURAL VALVE DETERIORATION IN MITRAL REPLACEMENT SURGERY: COMPARISON OF CARPENTIER-EDWARDS SUPRA-ANNULAR PORCINE AND PERIMOUNT PERICARDIAL BIOPROSTHESES W. R. Eric Jamieson, MD a Michel A. Marchand,
More informationThe risk-benefit ratio of mitral valve operation is
Degenerative Mitral Regurgitation: When Should We Operate? Malcolm J. R. Dalrymple-Hay, PhD, Mark Bryant, Richard A. Jones, MRCP, Stephen M. Langley, FRCS, Steven A. Livesey, FRCS, and James L. Monro,
More informationCongenital. Unicuspid Bicuspid Quadricuspid
David Letterman s Top 10 Aortic Stenosis The victim can be anyone: Echo is the question and the answer!!!! Hilton Head Island Echocardiography Conference 2012 Timothy E. Paterick, MD, JD, MBA Christopher
More informationRepair or Replacement
Surgical intervention post MitraClip Device: Repair or Replacement Saudi Heart Association, February 21-24 Rüdiger Lange, MD, PhD Nicolo Piazza, MD, FRCPC, FESC German Heart Center, Munich, Germany Division
More informationPATIENT BOOKLET MEDTRONIC SURGICAL VALVE REPLACEMENT. Tissue Valve for Aortic and Mitral Valve Replacement
PATIENT BOOKLET MEDTRONIC SURGICAL VALVE REPLACEMENT Tissue Valve for Aortic and Mitral Valve Replacement ARE MEDTRONIC SURGICAL TISSUE HEART VALVES RIGHT FOR YOU? Medtronic surgical heart valves are for
More informationCIPG Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement- When Is Less, More?
CIPG 2013 Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement- When Is Less, More? James D. Rossen, M.D. Professor of Medicine and Neurosurgery Director, Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory and Interventional Cardiology
More informationCourse Learning Objectives Sunday, February 17 Friday, February 22
Course Learning Objectives Sunday, February 17 Friday, February 22 1. Define the physical principles of ultrasound technology and its applications for two and threedimensional (2D, 3D) imaging and use
More informationEchocardiographic Evaluation of Aortic Valve Prosthesis
Echocardiographic Evaluation of Aortic Valve Prosthesis Amr E Abbas, MD, FACC, FASE, FSCAI, FSVM, RPVI Co-Director, Echocardiography, Director, Interventional Cardiology Research, Beaumont Health System
More informationDurability and Outcome of Aortic Valve Replacement With Mitral Valve Repair Versus Double Valve Replacement
Durability and Outcome of Aortic Valve Replacement With Mitral Valve Repair Versus Double Valve Replacement Masaki Hamamoto, MD, Ko Bando, MD, Junjiro Kobayashi, MD, Toshihiko Satoh, MD, MPH, Yoshikado
More informationAffecting the elderly Requiring new approaches. Echocardiographic Evaluation of Hemodynamic Severity. Increasing prevalence Mostly degenerative
Echocardiographic Evaluation of Hemodynamic Severity Steven J. Lester MD, FACC, FRCP(C), FASE Mayo Clinic, Arizona Relevant Financial Relationship(s) None Off Label Usage None A re-emerging public-health
More informationEcho Week - Learning Objectives
Echo Week - Learning Objectives Sunday, February 25 5-7 pm Physics Review Moderator: Mark Taylor, MD 1. Understand the ultrasound physics and apply it to image creation and optimization 2. Infer the interaction
More informationSotirios N. Prapas, M.D., Ph.D, F.E.C.T.S.
CORONARY ARTERY REVASCULARIZATION WITH MILD AORTIC STENOSIS: STRATEGIES OF TREATMENT 9 th ANNUAL MEETING OF THE EAB SOCIETY, Pravets, Bulgaria, 2012 Sotirios N. Prapas, M.D., Ph.D, F.E.C.T.S. Director
More informationAppropriate Use of TAVR - now and in the future. A Surgeon s Perspective. Neil Moat Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK
Appropriate Use of TAVR - now and in the future A Surgeon s Perspective Neil Moat Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK Disclosure Statement of Financial Interest Within the past 12 months, I or my spouse/partner
More informationComparative Rest and Exercise Hemodynamics of 23-mm Stentless Versus 23-mm Stented Aortic Bioprostheses
Comparative Rest and Exercise Hemodynamics of 23-mm Stentless Versus 23-mm Stented Aortic Bioprostheses Roland Fries, MD, Olaf Wendler, MD, Hermann Schieffer, MD, and Hans-Joachim Schäfers, MD, PhD Departments
More informationTAVR for Valve-In-Valve. Brian O Neill Assistant Professor of Medicine Department of Medicine, Section of Cardiology
TAVR for Valve-In-Valve Brian O Neill Assistant Professor of Medicine Department of Medicine, Section of Cardiology Temple Hearth and Vascular Institute Disclosures: Consultant: Cardiac Assist TAVR for
More informationTSDA ACGME Milestones
TSDA ACGME Milestones Short MW and Edwards JA. Assessing resident milestones using a CASPE March 2012 Short MW and Edwards JA. Assessing resident milestones using a CASPE March 2012 Short
More informationValvular Heart Disease
Valvular Heart Disease B K Singh, MD, FACC Disclosures: None 1 CARDIAC CYCLE S2 S2=A2P2 S1=M1T1 S4 S1 S3 2 JVP Carotid S1 Slitting of S2 S3 S4 Ejection click Opening snap Dynamic Auscultation What is the
More informationTAVI- Is Stroke Risk the Achilles Heel of Percutaneous Aortic Valve Repair?
TAVI- Is Stroke Risk the Achilles Heel of Percutaneous Aortic Valve Repair? Elaine E. Tseng, MD and Marlene Grenon, MD Department of Surgery Divisions of Adult Cardiothoracic and Vascular and Endovascular
More informationWhich Type of Secondary Tricuspid Regurgitation Accompanying Mitral Valve Disease Should Be Surgically Treated?
Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2013; 19: 428 434 Online January 31, 2013 doi: 10.5761/atcs.oa.12.01929 Original Article Which Type of Secondary Tricuspid Regurgitation Accompanying Mitral Valve Disease Should
More informationAnn Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2015; 21: Online April 18, 2014 doi: /atcs.oa Original Article
Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2015; 21: 53 58 Online April 18, 2014 doi: 10.5761/atcs.oa.13-00364 Original Article The Impact of Preoperative and Postoperative Pulmonary Hypertension on Long-Term Surgical
More informationORIGINAL PAPER. The long-term results and changing patterns of biological valves at the mitral position in contemporary practice in Japan
Nagoya J. Med. Sci. 78. 369 ~ 376, 2016 doi:10.18999/nagjms.78.4.369 ORIGINAL PAPER The long-term results and changing patterns of biological valves at the mitral position in contemporary practice in Japan
More informationAortic Root Replacement Using an Allograft for Active Infective Endocarditis With Periannular Abscess: Single Center Experience
J Cardiol 2004 Jun; 436: 267 271 : Aortic Root Replacement Using an Allograft for Active Infective Endocarditis With Periannular Abscess: Single Center Experience Kazuhito Shunei Shinichi Noboru Sakiko
More informationAutologous Pulmonary Valve Replacement of the Diseased Aortic Valve
Autologous Pulmonary Valve Replacement of the Diseased Aortic Valve By L. GONZALEZ-LAvIN, M.D., M. GEENS. M.D., J. SOMERVILLE, M.D., M.R.C.P., ANm D. N. Ross, M.B., CH.B., F.R.C.S. SUMMARY Living tissue
More informationLate failure of transcatheter heart valves: An open question
Late failure of transcatheter heart valves: An open question A comparison with surgically implanted bioprosthetic heart valves. A. Rashid The Cardiothoracic Centre Liverpool, UK. Conflict of Interest Statement
More informationTrifecta Valve. Clinical Compendium. Five Year Data
Trifecta Valve Clinical Compendium Five Year Data Trifecta Valve Compendium INTRODUCTION The Trifecta valve is a tri-leaflet stented pericardial valve designed for supra-annular placement in the aortic
More information