Choice of Prosthetic Heart Valves: Update for the Next Generation

Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Volumn 42, Issue 10, 2003, Pages 1717-1719

  Bach, David S ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b L3119 Women's 0273 ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE DISTRIBUTION; BIOPROSTHESIS; CLINICAL TRIAL; HEART ASSIST DEVICE; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HUMAN; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; PATIENT CARE; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW; VALVULAR HEART DISEASE;

EID: 0242543998     PISSN: 07351097     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2003.06.009     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Rahimtoola SH. Choice of prosthetic heart valve for adult patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:893-904.
2. Bloomfield P, Wheatley DJ, Prescott RJ, Miller HC. Twelve-year comparison of a Bjork-Shiley mechanical heart-valve with porcine bioprosthesis. N Engl J Med 1991;324:573-9.
3. Hammermeister KE, Sethi GK, Henderson WC, Grover FL, Oprian C, Rahimtoola SH. Outcomes 15 years after valve replacement with a mechanical versus bioprosthetic valve: final report of the Veterans Affairs randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36: 1152-8.
4. Cohn LH, Collins JJ, Jr., Rizzo RJ, Adams DH, Cooper GS, Avanki SF. Twenty-year follow-up of the Hancock modified orifice porcine aortic valve. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;66:S30-4.
5. David TE, Ivanor J, Armstrong S, Feindel CM, Cohen G. Late results of heart valve replacement with the Hancock II bioprosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2001;121:268-78.
6. Gott JP, Girardot JM, Girardot NM, et al. Refinement of the alpha aminooleic acid bioprosthetic valve anticalcification technique. Ann Thorac Surg 1997;64:50-8.
7. Doty DB, Cafferty A, Cartier P, et al. Aortic valve replacement with Medtronic Freestyle bioprosthesis: five year results. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;11 Suppl 1:35-41.
8. Bach DS, Goldman B, Verrier E, et al. Eight year hemodynamic follow-up after aortic valve replacement with the Toronto SPV stentless aortic valve. Semin Thor Cardiovasc Surg 2001;13 Suppl 1:173-9.
9. Melina G, Rubens MB, Amrani M, Khaghani A, Yacoub MH. Electron bean tomography for cusp calcification in homograft versus Freestyle xenografts. Ann Thorac Surg 2001;71 Suppl:S368-70.
10. David TE, Puschmann R, Ivanov J, et al. Aortic valve replacement with stentless and stented porcine valves: a case-match study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;116:236-41.
11. Del Rizzo DF, Abdoh A, Cartier P, Doty D, Westaby S. The effect of prosthetic valve type on survival after aortic valve surgery. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;11 Suppl 1:1-8.
12. Westaby S, Horton M, Jin XY, et al. Survival advantage of stentless aortic bioprostheses. Ann Thorac Surg 2000;70:785-90.
13. Luciani GB, Auriemma S, Santini F, Casali G, Barozzi L, Mazzucco A. Comparison of late outcome after stentless versus stented xenograft aortic valve replacement. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2001;13 Suppl 1:136-42.
14. Bach DS, Sakwa MP, Goldbach M, Petracek M, Mohr F. Hemodynamic and early clinical performance of the St. Jude Medical Regent mechanical aortic valve. Ann Thorac Surg 2002;74: 2003-9.
15. Medalion B, Blackstone EH, Lytle BW, White J, Arnold JH, Cosgrove DM. Aortic valve replacement: is valve size important? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2000;119:963-74.
16. Rao V, Jamieson WRE, Ivanor J, Armstrong S, David T. Prosthesis-patient mismatch affects survival after aortic valve replacement. Circulation 2000;102 Suppl III:III5-9.
17. Grunkemeier GL, Li H-H, Naftel DC, Starr A, Rahimtoola SH. Long-term performance of heart valve prosthesis. Curr Probl Cardiol 2000;25:73-156.
18. Banbury MK, Cosgrove DM III, White JA, Blackstone EH, Frater RWM, Okies JE. Age and valve size effect on the long-term durability of the Carpentier-Edwards aortic pericardial prosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 2001;72:753-7.