Introduction of a flexible polymeric heart valve prosthesis with special design for mitral position

Circulation

Volumn 108, Issue 10 SUPPL., 2003, Pages

  Daebritz, Sabine H ^a   Sachweh, Jörg S ^b   Hermanns, Benita ^b   Fausten, Bernd ^b   Franke, Andreas ^b   Groetzner, Jan ^b   Klosterhalfen, Bernd ^b   Messmer, Bruno J ^b  

^a LUDWIG MAXIMILIANS UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Biodegradation; Heart valve prosthesis; Mitral valve surgery; Polyurethane

Indexed keywords

POLYCARBONATURETHANE; POLYMER; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ANIMAL MODEL; AORTA VALVE; ARTICLE; AUTOPSY; BIOCOMPATIBILITY; BIOPROSTHESIS; CALCIFICATION; CATTLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEGENERATION; ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; HEART HEMODYNAMICS; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HEMODYNAMIC MONITORING; HISTOLOGY; IN VITRO STUDY; MITRAL VALVE; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; RADIOGRAPHY; TWO DIMENSIONAL ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY;

ANIMALS; BIOPROSTHESIS; CATTLE; FEMALE; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; MITRAL VALVE; POLYURETHANES;

EID: 0042417053     PISSN: 00097322     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Roe BB, Moore D. Design and fabrication of prosthetic valves. Exper Med Surg. 1958;16:167-177,
2. Braunwald NS, Morrow AG, A late evaluation of flexible Teflon Prostheses ultilized for total aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1965;49:485-496.
3. Zdrahala RJ, Zdrahala IJ. Biomedical applications of Polyurethanes: a review of past promises, present realities and a vibrant future. J Biomater Appl. 1999;14:67-90.
4. Bernacca GM, Straub I, Wheatley DJ. Mechanical and morphological study of biostable polyurethane heart valve leaflets explanted from sheep. J Biomat Mater Res. 2002;61:138-145.
5. Hyde JAJ, Chinn JA, Philips RE. Polymer Heart Valves. J Heart Valve Dis. 1999;8:331-339.
6. Edmunds HL. Is prosthetic valve thrombogenity related to design of material? Texas Heart Institute. 1996;23:24-27.
7. Reul H, Talukder N. Heart Valve Mechanics. In: Quantitative Cardiovascular Studies: Clinical and Research Applications of Engineering Principles. Hwang NHC, Gross DR, Patel DJ, eds. Baltimore: University Park Press, 1979;12:527-564.
8. Schoen FJ, Levy RJ, Hilbert SL, et al. Antimineralization treatments for bioprosthetic heart valves. Assessment for efficacy and safety. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1992;104:1285-1291.
9. FDA (Food and Drug Administration): Replacement Heart Valve-Guidance for Data to be Submitted to the Food and Drug Administration in Support of Applications for Premarket Approval. FDA, Rockville, Maryland, 1994.
10. Starr A, Edwards ML. Mitral valve replacement: clinical experience with a ball valve prosthesis. Ann Surg. 1961;154:726.
11. Roe BB, Kelly PB, Myers JL, et al. Tricuspid leaflet aortic valve prosthesis. Circulation. 1966;33:124-127.
12. Hufnagel CA. Reflections on the development of valvular prostheses. Med Instrum. 1977;11:74-76.
13. Imamura E, Kaye MP. Function of Expanded-Polytetrafluoroethylene laminated Trileaflet Valves in Animals. Mayo Clin Proc. 1977;52:770-775.
14. Ghista DN, Reul H. Optimal prosthetic aortic leaflet valve: design parametric and longevity analyses: development of the Avothane-51 leaflet valve based on the optimum design analysis. J Biomechanics. 1977;10:313-324.
15. Chetta GE, Lloyd JR. The design, fabrication and evaluation of a trileaflet prosthetic heart valve. J Biomed Engineer. 1980;102:34-41.
16. Wisman CB, Pierce WS, Donachy JH, et al. A polyurethane trileaflet cardiac valve prosthesis: in vitro and in vivo studies. Transactions - Am Soc Artific Int Org. 1982;28:164-168.
17. Hilbert SL, Ferrans VJ, Tomita Y, et al. Evaluation of explanted polyurethane trileaflet cardiac valve prostheses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1987;94:419-429.
18. Nistal F, Garcia-Martinez V, Arbe E, et al. I. In vivo experimental assessment of polytetrafluoroethylene trileaflet heart valve prosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1990;99(6):1074-1081.
19. Lo HB, Herold M, Reul H, et al. A tricuspid polyurethane heart valve as an alternative to mechanical prostheses or bioprostheses. ASAIO Transactions. 1988;34:839-844.
20. Herold M, Lo HB, Reul H, Mückter H, et al. The Helmholtz Institute tri-leaflet polyurethane heart valve prosthesis: design, manufacture, and first in vitro and in vivo results. In: Planck H, Syre I, Dauner M, Egbers G, eds. Polyurethanes in Biomedical Engineering II. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1987.
21. Hoffman D, Sisto L, Dahm M, et al. Evaluation of a Stented Polyurethane Mitral Valve Prosthesis. Trans Am Soc Artif Intern Org. 1991;37:354-355.
22. Wheatley DJ, Raco L, Bernacca GM, et al. Polyurethane: material for the next generation of heart valve prostheses? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2000;17:440-448.
23. Jansen J, Willeke S, Reiners B, et al. Advances in design principle and fluid dynamics of a flexible polymeric heart valve. ASAIO Transactions. 1991;37:451-453.
24. Schoen FJ, Harasaki H, Kim KM, et al. Biomaterial-associated calcification: Pathology, mechanisms, and strategy of prevention. J Biomed Mater Res: Applied Biomaterials. 1988;22:11-36.
25. Jones M, Bamhart GR, Chavez AM, et al. Experimental evaluation of bioprosthetic valves implanted in sheep. In: Cohn LH, Gallucci V (eds). Cardiac Biosprostheses. New York, Yorke Medical Books, 1982:275-292.
26. Eichinger WB, Botzenhardt F, Gunzinger R et al. European experience with the Mosaic bioprosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2002;124:333-339.
27. Marchand MA, Aupart MR, Norton R, et al. Fifteen-year experience with the mitral Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT pericardial bioprosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;71(5 Suppl):236-239.