Choice of prosthetic heart valve in today's practice

Circulation

Volumn 117, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 253-256

  El Oakley, Reida ^a   Kleine, Peter ^b   Bach, David S ^c  

^a PRINCE SULTAN CARDIAC CENTER   (Saudi Arabia)

^b GOETHE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HUMAN; LIFESTYLE MODIFICATION; MORTALITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REOPERATION; SURGICAL RISK; VALVULAR HEART DISEASE;

ALGORITHMS; BIOPROSTHESIS; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HUMANS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; REOPERATION; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; SURVIVAL RATE;

EID: 38049129137     PISSN: 00097322     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.736819     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Rahimtoola SH. Lessons learned about the determinants of the results of valve surgery. Circulation. 1988;78:1503-1507.
2. Rahimtoola SH. Choice of prosthetic heart valve for adult patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:893-904.
3. Bach DS. Choice of prosthetic heart valves: update for the next generation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42:1717-1719.
4. Oxenham H, Bloomfield P, Wheatley DJ, Lee RJ, Cunningham J, Prescott RJ, Miller HC. Twenty year comparison of a Bjork-Shiley mechanical heart valve with porcine bioprostheses. Heart. 2003;89:715-721.
5. Hammermeister K, Sethi GK, Henderson WG, Grover FL, Oprian C, Rahimtoola SH. Outcomes 15 years after valve replacement with a mechanical versus a bioprosthetic valve: final report of the Veterans Affairs randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36:1152-1158.
6. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Patients with Valvular Heart Disease). J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:1486-1582.
7. American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1998 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease), Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC Jr, Faxon DP, Freed MD, Gaasch WH, Lytle BW, Nishimura RA, O'Gara PT, O'Rourke RA, Otto CM, Shah PM, Shanewise JS, Smith SC Jr, Jacobs AK, Adams CD, Anderson JL, Antman EM, Fuster V, Halperin JL, Hiratzka LF, Hunt SA, Lytle BW, Nishimura R, Page RL, Riegel B. ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (writing Committee to Revise the 1998 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease) developed in collaboration with the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists endorsed by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:e1-e148.
8. Vahanian A, Baumgartner H, Bax J, Butchart E, Dion R, Filippatos G, Flachskampf F, Hall R, Iung B, Kasprzak J, Nataf P, Tornos P, Torracca L, Wenink A, for the Task Force on the Management of Valvular Hearth Disease of the European Society of Cardiology and ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease: the Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2007;28:230-268.
9. Lund O, Bland M. Risk-corrected impact of mechanical versus bioprosthetic valves on long-term mortality after aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;132:20-26.
10. Chan V, Jamieson WRE, Germann E, Chan F, Miyagishima RT, Burr LH, Janusz MT, Ling H, Fradet GJ. Performance of bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses assessed by composite of valve-related complications to 15 years after aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;131:1267-1273.
11. Dagenais F, Cartier P, Voisine P, Desaulniers D, Perron J, Maillot R, Raymond G, Métras J, Doyle D, Mathieu P. Which biologic valve should we select for the 45- to 65-year-old age group requiring aortic valve replacement? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;129:1041-1049.
12. David TE, Ivanov J, Armstrong S, Feindel CM, Cohen G. Late results of heart valve replacement with the Hancock II bioprosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2001;121:268-278.
13. Cohn LH, Collins JJ Jr, Rizzo RJ, Adams DH, Couper GS, Aranki SF. Twenty-year follow-up of the Hancock modified orifice porcine aortic valve. Ann Thorac Surg. 1998;66(suppl):S30-S34.
14. 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 bioprosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;72:753-757.
15. Bach DS, Metras J, Doty JR, Yun KL, Dumesnil JG, Kon ND. Freedom from structural valve deterioration among patients 60 years of age and younger undergoing Freestyle aortic valve replacement. J Heart Valve Dis. In press.
16. Garcia D, Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG, Sakr F, Durand LG. Assessment of aortic valve stenosis severity: a new index based on the energy loss concept. Circulation. 2000;101:765-771.
17. Bakhtiary F, Dzemali O, Steinseiffer U, Schmitz C, Glasmacher B, Moritz A, Kleine P. Opening and closing kinematics of fresh and calcified aortic valve prostheses: an in vitro study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007;134:657-662.
18. Bakhtiary F, Abolmaali N, Dzemali O, Wittlinger T, Doss M, Moritz A, Kleine P. Impact of mechanical and biological aortic valve replacement on coronary perfusion: a prospective randomized study. J Heart Valve Dis. 2006;15:5-11.
19. Roques F, Michel P, Gladstone AR, Nashef SAM. The logistic EuroSCORE. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:1-2.