Stentless versus stented bioprosthetic aortic valves : A consensus statement of the international society of minimally invasive cardiothoracic surgery (ISMICS) 2008

Innovations: Technology and Techniques in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 49-60

  Pepper, John ^a   Cheng, Davy ^b   Stanbridge, Rex ^c   Ferdinand, Francis D ^d   Jamieson, W R Eric ^e   Stelzer, Paul ^f   Berg, Geoffrey ^g   Sani, Guido ^h   Martin, Janet ⁱ  

^a ROYAL BROMPTON HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^c ST MARY S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^d LANKENAU HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^f MOUNT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^g GOLDEN JUBILEE NATIONAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^h UNIVERSITY OF SIENA   (Italy)

ⁱ LONDON HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Aortic valve surgery; Consensus statements; Stentless valve surgery

Indexed keywords

AORTA VALVE PROSTHESIS; AORTA VALVE REPLACEMENT; BIOPROSTHESIS; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONSENSUS; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; FUNDING; HEART FUNCTION; HEMODYNAMIC PARAMETERS; HUMAN; MEDICAL SOCIETY; MORBIDITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; STENT; SURGICAL MORTALITY; VALIDITY;

EID: 70349293711     PISSN: 15569845     EISSN: 15590879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/155698450900400202     Document Type: Review

References (19)

1. Levy D, Garrison RJ, Savage DD, et al. Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determine left ventricular mass in the Framing-ham heart study. N Engl J Med. 1990;322:1561-1566.
2. Sharma UC, Barenbrug P, Pokharel S, et al. Systematic review of the outcome of aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;78:90-95.
3. Kunadian B, Vijayalakshmi K, Thornley AR, et al. Meta-Analysis of valve hemodynamics and left ventricular mass regression for stentless versus stented aortic valves. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;84:73-79.
4. Raja SG, MacArthur KJ, Pollock JC. Impact of stentless aortic valves on left ventricular function and hypertrophy: current best available evidence. J Card Surg. 2006;21:313-319.
5. Kallikourdis A, Jacob S. Is a stentless aortic valve superior to conventional bioprosthetic valves for aortic valve replacement? Interact Car-diovasc Thorac Surg. 2007;6:665-672.
6. Sackett DL, Straus SE, Richardson WS, et al. Evidence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM. 2nd ed. London: Churchill Livingstone; 2000.
7. Cheng D, Pepper J, Martin J, et al. Stentless versus stented bioprosthetic aortic valves: a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials. Innovations. 2009;4:61-73.
8. Colditz GA, Miller JN, Mosteller F. How study design affects outcomes in comparisons of therapy. I. Medical. Stat Med. 1989;8:441-454. (Pubitemid 19105892)
9. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, et al. Does quality of reports of randomized trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet. 1998;352:609-613.
10. Milz S, Colditz GA, Mosteller F. How study design affects outcomes in comparisons of therapy. II. Surgical. Stat Med. 1989;8:455-466. (Pubitemid 19105893)
11. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, et al. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA. 1995;273:408-412.
12. Shekelle PG, Woolf SH, Eccles M, et al. Clinical guidelines: developing guidelines. BMJ. 1999;318:593-596.
13. Shiffman RN, Shekelle P, Overhage M, et al. Standardized reporting of clinical practice guidelines: a proposal from the conference on guideline standardization. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139:493-498.
14. Bakhtiary F, Schiemann M, Dzemali O, et al. Stentless bioprostheses improve postoperative coronary flow more than stented prostheses after valve replace-mentforaortic stenosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;131:883-888.
15. Sackett DL. Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest. 1986;89:2-3.
16. Puskas J, Cheng D, Knight J, et al. Off-pump versus conventional coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis and consensus statement from the 2004 ISMICS consensus conference. Innov: Technol Tech Cardiothorac Vasc Surg. 2005;1:2-27.
17. Allen K, Cheng D, Cohn W, et al. Endoscopic vascular harvest in coronary artery bypass grafting surgery: a consensus statement of the International Society of Minimally Invasive Coronary Surgery (ISMICS). Innov: Technol Tech Cardiothorac Vasc Surg. 2005;1: 51-60.
18. Diegeler A, Cheng D, Allen K, et al. Transmyocardial laser revascular-ization: a consensus statement of the International Society of Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery (ISMICS) 2006. Innov: Technol Tech Cardiothorac Vasc Surg. 2006;1:314-322.
19. Downey R, Cheng D, Kernstine K, et al. Video-assisted thoracic surgery in lung cancer resection: a consensus statement of the International Society of Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery (ISMICS) 2007. Innov: Technol Tech Cardiothorac Vasc Surg. 2007;2:293-302.