Are all bileaflet mechanical valves equal?

Current Opinion in Cardiology

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 136-141

  Halkos, Michael E ^a   Puskas, John D ^a  

^a EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Anticoagulation; Bileaflet heart valves; Bioprosthetic heart valves; Mechanical heart valves

Indexed keywords

ANTICOAGULANT AGENT; ANTITHROMBOCYTIC AGENT; WARFARIN;

ATS VALVE; BILEAFLET HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; BLEEDING; CARBOMEDICS PROSTHETIC HEART VALVE; CLINICAL TRIAL; HEART HEMODYNAMICS; HEART VALVE BIOPROSTHESIS; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HEART VALVE REPLACEMENT; HUMAN; LOW DRUG DOSE; POSTOPERATIVE THROMBOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REOPERATION; REVIEW; SAINT JUDE HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; THROMBOEMBOLISM; TREATMENT INDICATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VALVULAR HEART DISEASE;

ANIMALS; BIOPROSTHESIS; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; HEMODYNAMICS; HUMANS;

EID: 62249144298     PISSN: 02684705     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/HCO.0b013e328324e698     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Braunwald N, Cooper T, Morrow A. Complete replacement of the mitral valve. Successful clinical application of a flexible polyurethane prosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1960; 40:1-11.
2. Starr A. The artificial heart valve. Nature Med 2007; 13:xii-xvi.
3. Khan SS, Trento A, DeRobertis M, et al. Twenty-year comparison of tissue and mechanical valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2001; 122:257-269.
4. Emery RW, Krogh CC, Aron KV, et al. The St. Jude Medical cardiac valve prosthesis: a 25-year experience with single valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2005; 79:776-782.
5. Aagaard J, Tingleff J, Hansen CN, et al. Twelve years' clinical experience with the CarboMedics prosthetic heart valve. J Heart Valve Dis 2001; 10:177-184.
6. American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines; Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists; Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions; Society of Thoracic Surgeons, Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, et al. 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 of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation 2006; 114:e84-e231.
7. Jamieson WR, von Lipinski O, Miyagishima RT, et al. Performance of bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses assessed by composites of valve-related complications to 15-years after mitral valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005; 129:1301-1308.
8. Emery RW, Anderson RW, Lindsay WG, et al. Clinical and hemodynamic results with the St. Jude Medical aortic valve prosthesis. Surg Forum 1979; 30:235-238.
9. Butterfield M, Fisher J, Davies GA, Spyt TJ. Comparative study of the hydrodynamic function of the Carbomedics valve. Ann Thorac Surg 1991; 52:815-820.
10. Sezai A, Shiono M, Orime Y, et al. Evaluation of valve sound and its effects on ATS prosthetic valves in patients' quality of life. Ann Thorac Surg 2000; 69:507-512.
11. Hwang NH, Reul H, Reinhard P. In vitro evaluation of the long-body On-X bileaflet heart valve. J Heart Valve Dis 1998; 7:561-568.
12. Palatianos GM, Laczkovics AM, Simon P, et al. Multicentered European study on safety and effectiveness of the On-X prosthetic heart valve: intermediate follow-up. Ann Thorac Surg 2007; 83:40-46. This study documented the efficacy of the On-X valve as well as the excellent hemodynamic and safety profiles.
13. Bach DS, Sakwa MP, Goldbach M, et al. Hemodynamics and early clinical performance of the St. Jude Medical Regent mechanical aortic valve. Ann Thorac Surg 2002; 74:2003-2009.
14. Bottio T, Tarzia V, Rizzoli G, et al. In-vitro testing of three totally supra-annular bileaflet mechanical valve hydrodynamics in the Sheffield pulse duplicator. J Heart Valve Dis 2008; 17:222-226. In this in-vitro model, the hemodynamic performance of three different bileaflet models was compared.
15. Dohmen G, Schmitz C, Schmitz-Rode T, et al. Hemodynamics of high-performance bileaflet valves: comparison to simulated clinical Doppler measurements. J Heart Valve Dis 2006; 15:549-556.
16. Simon HA, Leo H, Carberry J, et al. Comparison of the hinge flow fields of two bileaflet mechanical heart valves under aortic and mitral conditions. Ann Biomed Eng 2004; 32:1607-1617.
17. Chambers JB, Oo L, Narracott A, et al. Nominal size in six bileaflet mechanical aortic valves: a comparison of orifice size and biologic equivalence. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003; 125:1388-1393.
18. Autschbach R, Walther T, Falk V, et al. Prospectively randomized comparison of different mechanical aortic valves. Circulation 2000; 102:III-1-III-4.
19. Chambers JB, Roxburgh J, Blauth C, et al. A randomized comparison of the MCRI On-X and CarboMedics Top Hat bileaflet mechanical replacement aortic valves: early postoperative hemodynamic function and clinical events. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005; 130:759-764.
20. Guenzinger R, Eichinger WB, Hettich I, et al. A prospective randomized comparison of the Medtronic Advantage Supra and St Jude Medical Regent mechanical heart valves in the aortic position: is there an additional benefit of supra-annular valve positioning? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008; 136:462-471. In this randomized, prospective study, no significant hemodynamic differences were observed between a complete supra-annular design and a design with some intra-annular component.
21. Moon MR, Pasque MK, Munfakh NA, et al. Prosthesis-patient mismatch after aortic valve replacement: impact of age and body size on late survival. Ann Thorac Surg 2006; 81:481-489.
22. Blackstone EH, Cosgrove DM, Jamieson WR, et al. Prosthesis size and long-term survival after aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003; 126:783-796.
23. Vicchio M, De Santo LS, Corte AD, et al. Aortic valve replacement with 19-mm bileaflet prostheses in the elderly: left ventricular mass regression and quality of life. J Heart Valve Dis 2008; 17:216-221. This study demonstrated that left ventricular mass regression occurred in elderly patients receiving a small prosthesis, suggesting that small prostheses can safely be placed in patients with a small aortic root.
24. Yoshikawa K, Fukunaga S, Arinaga K, et al. Long-term results of aortic valve replacement with a small St. Jude Medical valve in Japanese patients. Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 85:1303-1309. This study demonstrated excellent long-term outcomes and improved ventricular performance despite the presence of moderate patient-prosthesis mismatch.
25. Johnston RT, Weerasena NA, Butterfield M, et al. CarboMedics and St. Jude Medical bileaflet valves: an in vitro and in vivo comparison. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1992; 6:267-271.
26. Chambers J, Cross J, Deverall P, et al. Echocardiographic description of the CarboMedics bileaflet prosthetic heart valve. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21:398-405.
27. Chambers J, Ely JL. Early postoperative echocardiographic hemodynamic performance of the On-X prosthetic heart valve: a multicenter study. J Heart Valve Dis 1998; 7:569-574.
28. Vlahakes GJ. Mechanical heart valves: the test of time. Circulation 2007; 116:1759-1760. A brief communication about the time-tested results of mechanical heart valves.
29. Edmunds LH Jr, Clark RE, Cohn LH, et al. Guidelines for reporting morbidity and mortality after cardiac valvular operations. Ad hoc liaison committee for standardizing definitions of prosthetic heart valve morbidity of The American Association for Thoracic Surgery and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996; 112:708-711.
30. Emery RW, Krogh CC, Arom KV, et al. Long-term results with the St. Jude Medical aortic valve: a 25-year experience with single valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2005; 79:776-782.
31. Bryan AJ, Rogers CA, Bayliss K, et al. Prospective comparison of CarboMedics and St. Jude Medical bileaflet mechanical heart valve prostheses: ten-year follow-up. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2007; 133:614-622. This study documented excellent freedom from valve-related mortality in both of these models. In addition, bleeding event rates were 2-3% per year for each prosthesis.
32. Baykut D, Grize L, Schindler C, et al. Eleven-year single-center experience with the ATS open pivot bileaflet heart valve. Ann Thorac Surg 2006; 82:847-852.
33. McNicholas KW, Ivey TD, Metras J, et al. North American multicenter experience with the On-X prosthetic heart valve. J Heart Valve Dis 2006; 15:73-79.
34. Tossios P, Reber D, Oustria M, et al. Single-center experience with the On-X prosthetic heart valve between 1996 and 2005. J Heart Valve Dis 2007; 16:551-557.
35. Butchart EG, Payne N, Li HH, et al. Better anticoagulation control improves survival after valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002; 123:715-723.
36. Brown ML, Schaff HV, Lahr BD, et al. Aortic valve replacement in patients aged 50 to 70 years: improved outcome with mechanical versus biologic prostheses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008; 135:878-884. In this study, patients aged 50-70 years had improved long-term survival with a mechanical prosthesis compared with a bioprosthesis using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable analyses. Furthermore, bleeding complications were reported for both mechanical and biologic prostheses.
37. Williams MA, van Riet S. The On-X heart valve: mid-term results in a poorly anticoagulated population. J Heart Valve Dis 2006; 15:80-86.
38. 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.
39. Vicchio M, Delia Corte A, De Santo LS, et al. Tissue versus mechanical prostheses: quality of life in octogenarians. Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 85:1290-1295. This study reported good outcomes and acceptable quality-of-life scores among octogenarians receiving mechanical prostheses.
40. Kulik A, Bedard P, Lam B, et al. Mechanical versus bioprosthetic valve replacement in middle-aged patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2006; 30:485-491.