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

Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Volumn 117, Issue 5, 1999, Pages 890-897

  Peterseim, D S ^a   Cen, Y Y ^a   Cheruvu, S ^a   Landolfo, K ^a   Bashore, T M ^a   Lowe, J E ^a   Wolfe, W G ^a   Glower, D D ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AORTA VALVE DISEASE; AORTA VALVE PROSTHESIS; ARTICLE; BLEEDING; COMORBIDITY; ENDOCARDITIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REOPERATION; SURVIVAL RATE; THROMBOEMBOLISM; TREATMENT INDICATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0032899079     PISSN: 00225223     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5223(99)70368-5     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. T. Treasure Which prosthetic valve should we choose? Curr Opin Cardiol 10 1995 144 149
2. LH Burr WRE Jamieson AI Munro RT Miyagshima E. Germann Porcine bioprostheses in the elderly: clinical performance by age groups and valve position Ann Thorac Surg 60 1995 S264 S269
3. MH Hwang CM Burchfiel GK Sethi C Oprian FL Grover WG Henderson Comparison of the causes of late death following aortic and mitral valve replacement: VA co-operative study on valvular heart disease J Heart Valve Dis 3 1994 17 24
4. WRE. Jamieson Modern cardiac valve devices—bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses: state of the art J Card Surg 8 1993 89 98
5. AD Milano U Bortolotti A Mazzucco F Guerra A Magni V. Gallucci Aortic valve replacement with the Hancock Standard, Bjork-Shiley, and Lillehei-Kaster prostheses: a comparison based on follow-up from 1 to 15 years J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 98 1989 37 47
6. EA Davis PS Greene DE Cameron VL Gott JC Laschinger RS Stuart Bioprosthetic versus mechanical prostheses for aortic valve replacement in the elderly Circulation 94 Suppl 1996 II121 II125
7. GJ Fradet WRE Jamieson JG Abel SV Lichtenstein RT Miyagishima H Ling Clinical performance of biological and mechanical prostheses Ann Thorac Surg 60 1995 S453 S458
8. KE Hammermeister GK Sethi WG Henderson C Oprian T Kim S. Rahimtoola A comparison of outcomes in men 11 years after heart-valve replacement with a mechanical or bioprosthesis N Engl J Med 328 1993 1289 1296
9. K Holper M Wottke T Lewe L Baumer H Meisner SU Paek Bioprosthetic and mechanical valves in the elderly: benefits and risks Ann Thorac Surg 60 1995 S443 S446
10. AI Munro WRE Jamieson LH Burr H Ling RT Miyagishima E. Germann Comparison of porcine bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses in multiple valve replacement operations Ann Thorac Surg 60 1995 S459 S462
11. PSU Myken K Caidahl P Larsson S Larsson I Wallentin HE. Berggren Mechanical versus biological valve prosthesis: a ten-year comparison regarding function and quality of life Ann Thorac Surg 60 1995 S447 S452
12. JJ Caro K Migliaccio-Walle JA O'Brien The cost of treating heart valve related complications J Heart Valve Dis 5 1996 122 127
13. G Asimakopoulos MB Edwards KM. Taylor Aortic valve replacement in patients 80 years of age and older: survival and cause of death based on 1100 cases—collective results from the UK Heart Valve Registry Circulation 96 1997 3403 3408
14. KL Blair AC Hatton WD White LR Smith JE Lowe WG Wolfe Comparison of anticoagulation regimens following Carpentier-Edwards aortic or mitral valve replacement Circulation 90 Suppl 1994 II214 II219
15. LH Edmunds Jr RE Clark LH Cohn GL Grunkemeier DC Miller RD. Weisel Guidelines for reporting morbidity and mortality after cardiac valvular operations J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 112 1996 708 711
16. JL. Hintze Number cruncher statistical system: version 5.5: survival analysis 1988 Dr Jerry L. Hintze Kaysville [UT] 20 26
17. GL Grunkemeier WRE Jamieson DC Miller A. Starr Actuarial versus actual risk of porcine structural valve deterioration J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 108 1994 709 718
18. P Bloomfield DJ Wheatley RJ Prescott HC Miller Twelve-year comparison of a Björk-Shiley mechanical heart valve with porcine bioprostheses N Engl J Med 324 1991 573 579
19. DD Glower WD White AC Hatton LR Smith WG Young WG Wolfe Determinants of reoperation after 960 valve replacements with Carpentier-Edwards prostheses J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 107 1994 381 393
20. PS Douglas JW Hirschfield Jr RN Edie AH Harken LW Stephenson LH Edmunds Jr. Clinical comparison of St Jude and porcine aortic valve prostheses Circulation 72 Suppl 1985 II135 II139
21. BW Lytle DM Cosgrove PC Taylor M Goormastic RW Stewart LAR Golding Primary isolated aortic valve replacement: early and late results J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 97 1898 675 694
22. WRE Jamieson AI Munro LH Burr E Germann RT Miyagishima H. Ling Influence of coronary artery bypass and age on clinical performance after aortic and mitral valve replacement with biological and mechanical prostheses Circulation 92 Suppl 1995 II101 II106
23. Y Kobayashi K Eishi S Nagata K Nakano Y Sasako J Kobayashi Choice of replacement valve in the elderly J Heart Valve Dis 6 1997 404 409
24. SF Fighali A Avendano AE MacArthur VV Lee C Hernandez V Siero Early and late mortality of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement after previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery Circulation 92 Suppl 1995 II163 II168
25. CW Akins MJ Buckley WM Daggett AD Hilgenberg GJ Vlahakes DF Torchiana Risk of reoperative valve replacement for failed mitral and aortic bioprostheses Ann Thorac Surg 65 1998 1545 1551
26. MR Aupart AL Sirinelli FF Diemont YA Meurisse XB Dreyfus MA. Marchand The last generation of pericardial valves in the aortic position: ten-year follow-up in 589 patients Ann Thorac Surg 61 1996 615 620
27. RW Frater P Furlong DM Cosgrove JE Okies LQ Colburn AS Katz Long-term durability and patient functional status of the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount pericardial bioprosthesis in the aortic position J Heart Valve Dis 7 1998 48 53
28. WRE Jamieson LH Burr GFO Tyers AI. Munro Carpentier-Edwards standard and supra-annular porcine bioprostheses: 10 year comparison of structural valve deterioration J Heart Valve Dis 3 1994 59 65
29. H Reichenspurner C Weinhold G Nollert HG Kaulbach HO Vetter DH Boehm Comparison of porcine biological valves with pericardial valves: a 12-year clinical experience with 1123 bio-prostheses Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 43 1995 19 26
30. RW Emery KV Arom DM. Nicoloff Utilization of the St Jude Medical prosthesis in the aortic position Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 8 1996 231 236
31. J Fernandez GW Laub MS Adkins WA Anderson C Chen BM Bailey Early and late-phase events after valve replacement with the St Jude Medical prosthesis in 1200 patients J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 107 1994 394 406