Elderly valve replacement with bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses. Comparison by composites of complications

Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 191-199

  Suttie, S A ^a   Jamieson, W R E ^a,b   Burr, L H ^a   Germann, E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b ST PAUL S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Aged; Heart valves, surgery; Prosthesis implantation; Treatment, outcome

Indexed keywords

AGE; AGED; AORTA VALVE REPLACEMENT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; ELDERLY CARE; ENDOCARDITIS; FATALITY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GENDER; HEART VALVE BIOPROSTHESIS; HEART VALVE REPLACEMENT; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MITRAL VALVE REPLACEMENT; MORBIDITY; PREDICTION; REOPERATION; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SURGICAL MORTALITY; SURVIVAL RATE; VALVULAR HEART DISEASE;

ACTUARIAL ANALYSIS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AORTIC VALVE; BIOPROSTHESIS; EQUIPMENT FAILURE ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEART VALVE DISEASES; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; HUMANS; MALE; MITRAL VALVE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURVIVAL RATE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33646229084     PISSN: 00219509     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Asimakopoulos G, Edwards MB, Brannan J, Taylor KM. Survival and cause of death after mitral valve replacement in patients aged 80 years and over. Collective results from the UK Heart Valve Registry. Eur J of Cardiothorac Surg 1997;11:922-8.
2. Hinchman DA, Otto CM. Valvular disease in the elderly. Cardio Clin 1999;17:137-58.
3. Aziz S, Grover FL. Cardiovascular Surgery in the Elderly. Cardio Clin 1999;17:213-31.
4. Jamieson WR, Burr LH, Miyagishima RT, Germann E, Anderson WN. Actuarial versus actual freedom from structural valve deterioration with the Carpentier-Edwards porcine bioprostheses. Can J Cardiol 1999;15:973-8.
5. Jamieson WR, Munro AI, Burr LH, Germann E, Miyagishima RT, Ling H. Influence of Coronary Artery Bypass and Age on Clinical Performance after Aortic and Mitral Valve Replacement with Biological and Mechanical Prostheses. Circ 1995;92(suppl II):II-101-II-106.
6. Peterseim DS, Cen YY, Cheruvu S, Landolfo K, Bashore TM, Lowe JE et al. Long-term Outcome after biologic versus mechanical aortic valve replacement in 841 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;117:890-7.
7. Logeais Y, Langanay T, Corbineau H, Roussin R, Rioux C, Leguerrier A. Aortic Valve Replacement in the Elderly: Bioprosthesis or Mechanical Valve? Ann Thorac Surg 1998;66:S77-81.
8. Asimakopoulos G, Edwards MB, Taylor KM. 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. Circ 1997;96:3403-8.
9. Burr LH, Jamieson WR, Munro AI, Miyagishima RT, Janusz MT, Ling H et al. Structural valve deterioration in elderly patient populations with the Carpentier-Edwards standard and supra-annular porcine bioprostheses: a comparative study. J Heart Valve Dis 1992;1:87-91.
10. Jamieson WR, Burr LH, Munro AI, Miyagishima RT. Carpentier-Edwards Standard Porcine Bioprosthesis: A 21-year Experience. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;66:S40-3.
11. Ninet J, Tronc F, Robin J, Curtil A, Aleksic I, Champsaur G. Mechanical versus biological isolated aortic valvular replacement after the age of 70: equivalent long-term results. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1998;13:84-9.
12. Davis EA, Greene PS, Cameron DE, Gott VI, Laschinger JC, Stuart RS et al. Bioprosthetic versus mechanical prostheses for aortic valve replacement in the elderly. Circ 1996;94(suppl II):II-121-II-125.
13. Milano A, Guglielmi C, De Carlo M, Di Gregorio O, Borzoni G, Verunelli F et al. Valve-related complications in elderly patients with biological and mechanical aortic valves. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;66:S82-7.
14. Edmunds LH Jr, Clark RE, Cohn LH, Grunkemeier GL, Miller DC, Weisel RD. Guidelines for reporting morbidity and mortality after cardiac valvular operations. Ann Thorac Surg 1996;62:932-5.
15. Grunkemeier GL, Jamieson WR, Miller DC, Starr A. Actuarial versus actual risk of porcine structural valve deterioration. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1994;108:709-18.
16. Mahoney CB, Miller DC, Khan SS, Hill JD, Cohn LH. Twenty-year, three-institution evaluation of the hancock modified orifice aortic valve durability. Circulation 1998;98:II-88-II-94.
17. Jamieson WR, Burr LH, Janusz MT, Munro AI, Hayden RI, Miyagishima RT et al. Carpentier-Edwards standard and supraanular porcine bioprostheses: comparison of technology. Ann Thorac Surg 1999;67:10-7.
18. Grossi EA, Galloway AC, Zakow PK, Miller JS, Buttenheim PM, Baumann FG et al. Choice of mitral prosthesis in the elderly: an analysis of actual outcome. Circulation 1998;98:II-116-II-119.
19. Elayda MA, Hall RJ, Reul RM, Alonzo DM, Gillette N, Reul GJ Jr et al. Aortic valve replacement in patients 80 years and older. Operative risks and long-term results. Circulation 1993;88(part 2):11-6.
20. Jamieson WR, Edwards FH, Schwartz M, Bero JW, Clark RE, Grover FL. Risk stratification for cardiac valve replacement. National Cardiac Surgery Database. Ann Thorac Surg 1999;67:943-51.
21. Rizzoli G, Bottio T, De Perini L, Scalia D, Thiene G, Casarotto D. Multivariate analysis of survival after malfunctioning biological and mechanical prosthesis replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;66:S88-94.
22. He GW, Grunkemeier GL, Starr A. Aortic valve replacement in elderly patients: influence of concomitant coronary grafting on late survival. Ann Thorac Surg 1996;61:1746-51.