Diagnostic evaluation of left-sided prosthetic heart valve dysfunction

Nature Reviews Cardiology

Volumn 8, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 466-478

  Habets, Jesse ^a   Budde, Ricardo P ^a   Symersky, Petr ^b   Van Den Brink, Renee B ^b   De Mol, Bas A ^b   Mali, Willem P ^a   Van Herwerden, Lex A ^a   Chamuleau, Steven A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BACTERIAL ENDOCARDITIS; BJOERK SHILEY VALVE PROSTHESIS; CARBOMEDICS PROSTHETIC HEART VALVE; CARDIOVASCULAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; DOPPLER ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; FLUOROSCOPY; FOLLOW UP; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HEART VALVE REGURGITATION; HUMAN; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PATIENT PROSTHESIS MISMATCH; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHETIC VALVE DYSFUNCTION; PROSTHETIC VALVE ENDOCARDITIS; PROSTHETIC VALVE PANNUS; PROSTHETIC VALVE THROMBOSIS; REFERENCE VALUE; REVIEW; TRANSESOPHAGEAL ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; TRANSTHORACIC ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; TWO DIMENSIONAL ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY;

DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; FLUOROSCOPY; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 79960966500     PISSN: 17595002     EISSN: 17595010     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrcardio.2011.71     Document Type: Review

References (167)

1. Yacoub, M. H. & Takkenberg, J. J. Will heart valve tissue engineering change the world? Nat. Clin. Pract. Cardiovasc. Med. 2, 60-61 (2005). (Pubitemid 40778851)
2. Cannegieter, S. C., Rosendaal, F. R. & Briet, E. Thromboembolic and bleeding complications in patients with mechanical heart valve prostheses. Circulation 89, 635-641 (1994). (Pubitemid 24056190)
3. Khan, S. Long-term outcomes with mechanical and tissue valves. J. Heart Valve Dis. 11, S8-S14 (2002). (Pubitemid 34303045)
4. Grunkemeier, G. L., Li, H. H., Naftel, D. C., Starr, A. & Rahimtoola, S. H. Long-term performance of heart valve prostheses. Curr. Probl. Cardiol. 25, 73-154 (2000).
5. Hammermeister, K. et al. 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. 36, 1152-1158 (2000).
6. Akins, C. W. et al. Guidelines for reporting mortality and morbidity after cardiac valve interventions. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 135, 732-738 (2008). (Pubitemid 351417944)
7. Girard, S. E. et al. Reoperation for prosthetic aortic valve obstruction in the era of echocardiography: trends in diagnostic testing and comparison with surgical findings. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 37, 579-584 (2001).
8. Tsai, I. C. et al. Correctness of multi-detector-row computed tomography for diagnosing mechanical prosthetic heart valve disorders using operative findings as a gold standard. Eur. Radiol. 19, 857-867 (2009).
9. Teshima, H. et al. Usefulness of a multidetector-row computed tomography scanner for detecting pannus formation. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 77, 523-526 (2004). (Pubitemid 38186504)
10. Symersky, P., Budde, R. P., de Mol, B. A. & Prokop, M. Comparison of multidetector-row computed tomography to echocardiography and fluoroscopy for evaluation of patients with mechanical prosthetic valve obstruction. Am. J. Cardiol. 104, 1128-1134 (2009).
11. LaBounty, T. M. et al. Evaluation of mechanical heart valve size and function with ECG-gated 64-MDCT. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 193, W389-W396 (2009).
12. Konen, E. et al. The role of ECG-gated MDCT in the evaluation of aortic and mitral mechanical valves: initial experience. Am. J. Roentgenol. 191, 26-31 (2008). (Pubitemid 351955178)
13. Feuchtner, G. M. et al. Multislice computed tomography in infective endocarditis: comparison with transesophageal echocardiography and intraoperative findings. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 53, 436-444 (2009).
14. Chenot, F. et al. Evaluation of anatomic valve opening and leaflet morphology in aortic valve bioprosthesis by using multidetector CT: comparison with transthoracic echocardiography. Radiology 255, 377-385 (2010).
15. Soulen, R. L., Budinger, T. F. & Higgins, C. B. Magnetic resonance imaging of prosthetic heart valves. Radiology 154, 705-707 (1985). (Pubitemid 15162367)
16. von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff, F., Rudolph, A., Wassmuth, R. & Schulz-Menger, J. Assessment of mitral bioprostheses using cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J. Cardiovasc. Magn. Reson. 12, 36 (2010).
17. von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff, F. et al. Feasibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance to assess the orifice area of aortic bioprostheses. Circ. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2, 397-404 (2009).
18. Zoghbi, W. A. et al. Recommendations for evaluation of prosthetic valves with echocardiography and doppler ultrasound: a report From the American Society of Echocardiography's Guidelines and Standards Committee and the Task Force on Prosthetic Valves, developed in conjunction with the American College of Cardiology Cardiovascular Imaging Committee, Cardiac Imaging Committee of the American Heart Association, the European Association of Echocardiography, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology, the Japanese Society of Echocardiography and the Canadian Society of Echocardiography, endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation, American Heart Association, European Association of Echocardiography, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology, the Japanese Society of Echocardiography, and Canadian Society of Echocardiography. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 22, 975-1014 (2009).
19. Feigenbaum, H., Armstrong, W. F. & Thomas, R. in Feigenbaum's Echocardiography (eds Feigenbaum, H., Armstrong, W. F., Thomas, R.) 11-21 (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, 2005).
20. Bitar, J. N., Lechin, M. E., Salazar, G. & Zoghbi, W. A. Doppler echocardiographic assessment with the continuity equation of St Jude Medical mechanical prostheses in the mitral valve position. Am. J. Cardiol. 76, 287-293 (1995).
21. van den Brink, R. B. Evaluation of prosthetic heart valves by transesophageal echocardiography: problems, pitfalls, and timing of echocardiography. Semin. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 10, 89-100 (2006).
22. Garcia, D. & Kadem, L. What do you mean by aortic valve area: geometric orifice area, effective orifice area, or gorlin area? J. Heart Valve Dis. 15, 601-608 (2006).
23. Steiner, R. M. et al. The radiology of cardiac valve prostheses. Radiographics 8, 277-298 (1988).
24. Chambers, J., Coppack, F., Deverall, P., Jackson, G. & Sowton, E. The continuity equation tested in a bileaflet aortic prosthesis. Int. J. Cardiol. 31, 149-154 (1991).
25. Keser, N. et al. Hemodynamic evaluation of normally functioning Sulzer Carbo medics prosthetic valves. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 29, 649-657 (2003). (Pubitemid 36566543)
26. Hage, F. G. & Nanda, N. C. Guidelines for the evaluation of prosthetic valves with echocardiography and Doppler ultrasound: value and limitations. Echocardiography 27, 91-93 (2010).
27. Singh, P. et al. Usefulness of live/real time three-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography in evaluation of prosthetic valve function. Echocardiography 26, 1236-1249 (2009).
28. Feigenbaum H., Armstrong W. F., Thomas R. in Feigenbaum's echocardiography (eds. Feigenbaum H., Armstrong W. F., Thomas R.) 59-61 (Lippincott Williams&Wilkins, Philadelphia, 2005).
29. Zabalgoitia, M. et al. Improvement in the diagnosis of bioprosthetic valve dysfunction by transesophageal echocardiography. J. Heart Valve Dis. 2, 595-603 (1993).
30. Daniel, L. B., Grigg, L. E., Weisel, R. D. & Rakowski, H. Comparison of transthoracic and transesophageal assessment of prosthetic valve dysfunction. Echocardiography 7, 83-95 (1990). (Pubitemid 20161982)
31. Karalis, D. G. et al. Single-plane transesophageal echocardiography for assessing function of mechanical or bioprosthetic valves in the aortic valve position. Am. J. Cardiol. 69, 1310-1315 (1992).
32. Chaudhry, F. A., Herrera, C., DeFrino, P. F., Mehlman, D. J. & Zabalgoitia, M. Pathologic and angiographic correlations of transesophageal echocardiography in prosthetic heart valve dysfunction. Am. Heart J. 122, 1057-1064 (1991).
33. Cianciulli, T. E. et al. Cinefluoroscopic assessment of mechanical disc prostheses: its value as a complementary method to echocardiography. J. Heart Valve Dis. 14, 664-673 (2005).
34. Singh, P. et al. Live/real time three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiographic evaluation of mitral and aortic valve prosthetic paravalvular regurgitation. Echocardiography 26, 980-987 (2009).
35. Muratori, M. et al. Feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of quantitative assessment of mechanical prostheses leaflet motion by transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography in suspected prosthetic valve dysfunction. Am. J. Cardiol. 97, 94-100 (2006). (Pubitemid 41828130)
36. Faletra, F. F., Alain, M. & Moccetti, T. Blockage of bileaflet mitral valve prosthesis imaged by computed tomography virtual endoscopy. Heart 93, 324 (2007). (Pubitemid 46579521)
37. Symersky, P., Budde, R. P., Prokop, M. & de Mol, B. A. Multidetector-row computed tomography imaging characteristics of mechanical prosthetic valves. J. Heart Valve Dis. 20, 216-222 (2011).
38. Habets, J. et al. Prosthetic heart valve assessment with multidetector-row CT: imaging characteristics of 91 valves in 83 patients. Eur. Radiol. doi:101007/s00330-011-2068-8
39. Symersky, P., Budde, R. P., Prokop, M. & de Mol, B. A. Abstract 541: prosthetic valve evaluation using prospective triggering with 256-detector row computed tomography reduces radiation dose [abstract]. Circulation 120, S355 (2009).
40. Vahanian, A. et al. 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. 28, 230-268 (2007). (Pubitemid 46276943)
41. Lin, S. S. et al. Prediction of thrombus-related mechanical prosthetic valve dysfunction using transesophageal echocardiography. Am. J. Cardiol. 86, 1097-1101 (2000).
42. Licata, A. & Matthai, W. H. Jr Evaluating the etiology of mechanical valve obstruction: use of clinical parameters, fluoroscopy, and echocardiography. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 55, 495-500 (2002). (Pubitemid 34263175)
43. Teshima, H. et al. Obstruction of St Jude Medical valves in the aortic position: histology and immunohistochemistry of pannus. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 126, 401-407 (2003). (Pubitemid 37048504)
44. Deviri, E., Sareli, P., Wisenbaugh, T. & Cronje, S. L. Obstruction of mechanical heart valve prostheses: clinical aspects and surgical management. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 17, 646-650 (1991).
45. Barbetseas, J. et al. Differentiating thrombus from pannus formation in obstructed mechanical prosthetic valves: an evaluation of clinical, transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiographic parameters. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 32, 1410-1417 (1998). (Pubitemid 28522403)
46. Guiar-Souto, P., Mirelis, J. G. & Silva-Melchor, L. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease. Eur. Heart J. 28, 1267-1268 (2007).
47. Vitale, N. et al. Obstruction of mechanical mitral prostheses: analysis of pathologic findings. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 63, 1101-1106 (1997). (Pubitemid 27191669)
48. Kondruweit, M. et al. Early failure of a mechanical bileaflet aortic valve prosthesis due to pannus: a rare complication. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 136, 213-214 (2008).
49. Daniel, W. G. et al. Comparison of transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography for detection of abnormalities of prosthetic and bioprosthetic valves in the mitral and aortic positions. Am. J. Cardiol. 71, 210-215 (1993). (Pubitemid 23030646)
50. Montorsi, P., De, B. F., Muratori, M., Cavoretto, D. & Pepi, M. Role of cine-fluoroscopy, transthoracic, and transesophageal echocardiography in patients with suspected prosthetic heart valve thrombosis. Am. J. Cardiol. 85, 58-64 (2000). (Pubitemid 30045546)
51. Aoyagi, S. et al. Obstruction of St Jude medical valves in the aortic position: a consideration for pathogenic mechanism of prosthetic valve obstruction. Cardiovasc. Surg. 10, 339-344 (2002). (Pubitemid 35299933)
52. Chan, J. et al. Images in cardiovascular medicine. Cardiac CT assessment of prosthetic aortic valve dysfunction secondary to acute thrombosis and response to thrombolysis. Circulation 120, 1933-1934 (2009).
53. Bleiziffer, S. et al. Prediction of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch prior to aortic valve replacement: which is the best method? Heart 93, 615-620 (2007). (Pubitemid 46707117)
54. Urso, S., Sadaba, R. & Aldamiz-Echevarria, G. Is patient-prosthesis mismatch an independent risk factor for early and mid-term overall mortality in adult patients undergoing aortic valve replacement? Interact. Cardiovasc. Thorac. Surg. 9, 510-518 (2009).
55. Blais, C. et al. Impact of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch on short-term mortality after aortic valve replacement. Circulation 108, 983-988 (2003). (Pubitemid 37048229)
56. Pibarot, P. & Dumesnil, J. G. Hemodynamic and clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch in the aortic valve position and its prevention. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 36, 1131-1141 (2000).
57. Tasca, G. et al. Impact of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch on left ventricular mass regression following aortic valve replacement. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 79, 505-510 (2005). (Pubitemid 40186547)
58. Pibarot, P. & Dumesnil, J. G. Prevention of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch before aortic valve replacement: does it matter and is it feasible? Heart 93, 549-551 (2007). (Pubitemid 46707103)
59. Pibarot, P. & Dumesnil, J. G. Prosthesis-patient mismatch in the mitral position: old concept, new evidences. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 133, 1405-1408 (2007). (Pubitemid 46802612)
60. Yazdanbakhsh, A. P., van den Brink, R. B., Dekker, E. & de Mol, B. A. Small valve area index: its influence on early mortality after mitral valve replacement. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 17, 222-227 (2000). (Pubitemid 30182621)
61. LaBounty, T. M. et al. Hemodynamic and functional assessment of mechanical aortic valves using combined echocardiography and multidetector computed tomography. J. Cardiovasc. Comput. Tomogr. 3, 161-167 (2009).
62. Doddamani, S. et al. Demonstration of left ventricular outflow tract eccentricity by 64-slice multi-detector CT. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 25, 175-181 (2009).
63. Van den Brink, R. B. et al. Comparison of transthoracic and transesophageal color Doppler flow imaging in patients with mechanical prostheses in the mitral valve position. Am. J. Cardiol. 63, 1471-1474 (1989).
64. Daniel, L. B., Grigg, L. E., Weisel, R. D. & Rakowski, H. Comparison of transthoracic and transesophageal assessment of prosthetic valve dysfunction. Echocardiography 7, 83-95 (1990). (Pubitemid 20161982)
65. Bashore, T. M., Cabell, C. & Fowler, V. Jr Update on infective endocarditis. Curr. Probl. Cardiol. 31, 274-352 (2006).
66. Li, J. S. et al. Proposed modifications to the Duke criteria for the diagnosis of infective endocarditis. Clin. Infect. Dis. 30, 633-638 (2000).
67. Hanrath, P. Imaging techniques: transoesophageal echo-doppler in cardiology. Heart 86, 586-592 (2001). (Pubitemid 32999879)
68. Jacob, S. & Tong, A. T. Role of echocardiography in the diagnosis and management of infective endocarditis. Curr. Opin. Cardiol. 17, 478-485 (2002). (Pubitemid 35265784)
69. Bonow, R. O. et al. 2008 focused update incorporated into the 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).Endorsed by the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 52, e1-e142 (2008).
70. Daniel, W. G. et al. Comparison of transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography for detection of abnormalities of prosthetic and bioprosthetic valves in the mitral and aortic positions. Am. J. Cardiol. 71, 210-215 (1993). (Pubitemid 23030646)
71. Meijboom, W. B. et al. Pre-operative computed tomography coronary angiography to detect significant coronary artery disease in patients referred for cardiac valve surgery. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 48, 1658-1665 (2006). (Pubitemid 44528167)
72. Ro, T. K., Cotter, B. R., Simsir, S. A. & Karlsberg, R. P. Complicated ruptured sinus of Valsalva: cardiac computed tomographic angiography (64 slice) predicts surgical appearance and obviates need for invasive cardiac catheterization. Interact. Cardiovasc. Thorac. Surg. 9, 888-890 (2009).
73. Daniel, W. G. et al. Improvement in the diagnosis of abscesses associated with endocarditis by transesophageal echocardiography. N. Engl. J. Med. 324, 795-800 (1991).
74. Lerakis, S. et al. The role of transesophageal echocardiography in the diagnosis and management of patients with aortic perivalvular abscesses. Am. J. Med. Sci. 321, 152-155 (2001). (Pubitemid 32128794)
75. Leung, D. Y., Cranney, G. B., Hopkins, A. P. & Walsh, W. F. Role of transoesophageal echocardiography in the diagnosis and management of aortic root abscess. Br. Heart J. 72, 175-181 (1994). (Pubitemid 24251471)
76. Daniel, W. G. et al. Comparison of transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography for detection of abnormalities of prosthetic and bioprosthetic valves in the mitral and aortic positions. Am. J. Cardiol. 71, 210-215 (1993). (Pubitemid 23030646)
77. Teoh, K. H. et al. Clinical and Doppler echocardiographic evaluation of bioprosthetic valve failure after 10 years. Circulation 82, IV110-IV116 (1990).
78. Chen, Y. T. et al. Detection of prosthetic mitral valve leak: a comparative study using transesophageal echocardiography, transthoracic echocardiography, and auscultation. J. Clin. Ultrasound 18, 557-561 (1990).
79. Mahesh, B., Angelini, G., Caputo, M., Jin, X. Y. & Bryan, A. Prosthetic valve endocarditis. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 80, 1151-1158 (2005). (Pubitemid 41196850)
80. Effron, M. K. & Popp, R. L. Two-dimensional echocardiographic assessment of bioprosthetic valve dysfunction and infective endocarditis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2, 597-606 (1983). (Pubitemid 13013600)
81. Kirzner, C. F. et al. Hemodynamic performance evaluation of small aortic ATS Medical valves by Doppler echocardiography. J. Heart Valve Dis. 6, 661-665 (1997). (Pubitemid 27524046)
82. Karpuz, H. et al. Doppler echocardiographic assessment of the new ATS medical prosthetic valve in the aortic position. Am. J. Card Imaging 10, 254-260 (1996). (Pubitemid 27084766)
83. De Paulis, R. et al. Doppler echocardiography evaluation of the Carbo medics valve in patients with small aortic anulus and valve prosthesis-body surface area mismatch. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 108, 57-62 (1994). (Pubitemid 24224257)
84. Chakraborty, B., Quek, S., Pin, D. Z., Siong, C. T. & Kheng, T. L. Doppler echocardiographic assessment of normally functioning Starr-Edwards, carbo medics and Carpentier-Edwards valves in aortic position. Angiology 47, 481-489 (1996).
85. Chambers, J., Cross, J., Deverall, P. & Sowton, E. Echocardiographic description of the Carbo medics bileaflet prosthetic heart valve. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 21, 398-405 (1993). (Pubitemid 23047923)
86. De Paulis, R. et al. Hemodynamic performances of small diameter carbo medics and St Jude valves. J. Heart Valve Dis. 5, S339-S343 (1996). (Pubitemid 26393629)
87. Globits, S. et al. Doppler sonographic evaluation of the Carbo medics bileaflet valve prosthesis: one-year experience. J. Card Surg. 7, 9-16 (1992).
88. Ihlen, H. et al. Hemodynamic evaluation of the Carbo medics prosthetic heart valve in the aortic position: comparison of noninvasive and invasivse techniques. Am. Heart J. 123, 151-159 (1992).
89. Izzat, M. B., Birdi, I., Wilde, P., Bryan, A. J. & Angelini, G. D. Evaluation of the hemodynamic performance of small Carbo medics aortic prostheses using dobutamine-stress Doppler echocardiography. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 60, 1048-1052 (1995).
90. Gibbs, J. L., Wharton, G. A. & Williams, G. J. Doppler echocardiographic characteristics of the Carpentier-Edwards xenograft. Eur. Heart J. 7, 353-356 (1986). (Pubitemid 16120817)
91. Wiseth, R. et al. Hemodynamic evaluation by Doppler echocardiography of small (less than or equal to 21 mm) prostheses and bioprostheses in the aortic valve position. Am. J. Cardiol. 70, 240-246 (1992).
92. Gioia, G. & Rutsch, W. Normal echo-Doppler values in Duromedics valvular prostheses [Italian]. G. Ital. Cardiol. 18, 213-217 (1988).
93. Chambers, J. & Ely, J. L. Early postoperative echocardiographic hemodynamic performance of the On-X prosthetic heart valve: a multicenter study. J. Heart Valve Dis. 7, 569-573 (1998). (Pubitemid 28435395)
94. Noera, G. et al. Hemodynamic evaluation of the Carbo medics R, St Jude Medical HP and Sorin-Bicarbon valve in patients with small aortic annulus. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 11, 473-475 (1997).
95. Badano, L. et al. Normal echocardiographic characteristics of the Sorin Bicarbon bileaflet prosthetic heart valve in the mitral and aortic positions. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 10, 632-643 (1997). (Pubitemid 127799949)
96. Flameng, W. et al. Postoperative hemodynamics of two bileaflet heart valves in the aortic position. J. Heart Valve Dis. 6, 269-273 (1997). (Pubitemid 27242485)
97. Bech-Hanssen, O., Wallentin, I., Larsson, S. & Caidahl, K. Reference Doppler echocardiographic values for St Jude Medical, Omnicarbon, and Biocor prosthetic valves in the aortic position. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 11, 466-477 (1998). (Pubitemid 28224077)
98. Aris, A. et al. The 20 mm Medtronic Hall prosthesis in the small aortic root. J. Heart Valve Dis. 5, 459-462 (1996). (Pubitemid 26280954)
99. Henneke, K. H., Pongratz, G., Pohlmann, M. & Bachmann, K. Doppler echocardiographic determination of geometric orifice areas in mechanical aortic valve prostheses. Cardiology 86, 508-513 (1995).
100. Cooper, D. M. et al. Evaluation of normal prosthetic valve function by Doppler echocardiography. Am. Heart J. 114, 576-582 (1987). (Pubitemid 17137401)
101. Chafizadeh, E. R. & Zoghbi, W. A. Doppler echocardiographic assessment of the St Jude Medical prosthetic valve in the aortic position using the continuity equation. Circulation 83, 213-223 (1991).
102. Kadir, I. et al. Hemodynamics of St Jude Medical prostheses in the small aortic root: in vivo studies using dobutamine Doppler echocardiography. J. Heart Valve Dis. 6, 123-129 (1997). (Pubitemid 27166171)
103. Panidis, I. P., Ross, J. & Mintz, G. S. Normal and abnormal prosthetic valve function as assessed by Doppler echocardiography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 8, 317-326 (1986). (Pubitemid 16036465)
104. Perin, E. C., Jin, B. S., de Castro, C. M., Ferguson, J. J. & Hall, R. J. Doppler echocardiography in 180 normally functioning St Jude Medical aortic valve prostheses. Early and late postoperative assessments. Chest 100, 988-990 (1991).
105. Ren, J. F. et al. Effect of depressed left ventricular function on hemodynamics of normal St Jude Medical prosthesis in the aortic valve position. Am. J. Cardiol. 65, 1004-1009 (1990).
106. Carrel, T., Zingg, U., Jenni, R., Aeschbacher, B. & Turina, M. I. Early in vivo experience with the Hemodynamic Plus St Jude Medical heart valves in patients with narrowed aortic annulus. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 61, 1418-1422 (1996). (Pubitemid 26150231)
107. Laske, A. et al. Pressure gradients across bileaflet aortic valves by direct measurement and echocardiography. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 61, 48-57 (1996). (Pubitemid 26053490)
108. Kenny, A. et al. Hemodynamic evaluation of the Monostrut and spherical disc Bjork-Shiley aortic valve prosthesis with Doppler echocardiography. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 104, 1025-1028 (1992).
109. Sagar, K. B., Wann, L. S., Paulsen, W. H. & Romhilt, D. W. Doppler echocardiographic evaluation of Hancock and Bjork-Shiley prosthetic values. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 7, 681-687 (1986). (Pubitemid 16164397)
110. Gibbs, J. L., Wharton, G. A. & Williams, G. J. Doppler ultrasound of normally functioning mechanical mitral and aortic valve prostheses. Int. J. Cardiol. 18, 391-398 (1988). (Pubitemid 18045281)
111. Habib, G. et al. Contribution of Doppler echocardiography in the evaluation of normal and pathologic aortic valve prosthesis [abstract]. Arch. Mal. Coeur Vaiss. 83, 937-945 (1990). (Pubitemid 20191115)
112. Mikhail, A. A hemodynamic comparison of Omniscience and Medtronic Hall aortic prostheses. J. Heart Valve Dis. 5, 675-677 (1996).
113. Raisaro, A. et al. Doppler evaluation of the Sorin and Medtronic-Hall prostheses in the aortic position [Italian]. G. Ital. Cardiol. 18, 206-212 (1988).
114. Badano, L. et al. Doppler haemodynamic assessment of clinically and echocardiographically normal mitral and aortic Allcarbon valve prostheses. Valve Prostheses Ligurian Cooperative Doppler Study. Eur. Heart J. 14, 1602-1609 (1993). (Pubitemid 24041090)
115. Soo, C. S. et al. Doppler-echocardiographic assessment of Carbo medics prosthetic values in the mitral position. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 7, 159-164 (1994).
116. Bjørnerheim, R., Ihlen, H., Simonsen, S., Sire, S. & Svennevig, J. Hemodynamic characterization of the Carbo medics mitral valve prosthesis. J. Heart Valve Dis. 6, 115-122 (1997). (Pubitemid 27166170)
117. Mohan, J. C., Agrawal, R., Arora, R. & Khalilullah, M. Improved Doppler assessment of the Bjork-Shiley mitral prosthesis using the continuity equation. Int. J. Cardiol. 43, 321-326 (1994). (Pubitemid 24078760)
118. Eriksson, M., Brodin, L. A., Ericsson, A. & Lindblom, D. Doppler-derived pressure differences in normally functioning aortic valve prostheses. Studies in Bjork-Shiley monostrut and Biocor porcine prostheses. Scand. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 27, 93-97 (1993). (Pubitemid 23218302)
119. Myken, P. S. et al. Long-term Doppler echocardiographic results of aortic or mitral valve replacement with Biocor porcine bioprosthesis. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 116, 599-608 (1998). (Pubitemid 28460626)
120. Eriksson, M. J., Brodin, L. A., Dellgren, G. N. & Radegran, K. Rest and exercise hemodynamics of an extended stentless aortic bioprosthesis. J. Heart Valve Dis. 6, 653-660 (1997). (Pubitemid 27524045)
121. Gonzalez-Juanatey, J. R. et al. Hemodynamics of various designs of 19 mm pericardial aortic valve bioprosthesis. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 10, 201-206 (1996). (Pubitemid 126690716)
122. Gonzalez-Juanatey, J. R. et al. Doppler echocardiographic evaluation of the Bioflo pericardial bioprosthesis. J. Heart Valve Dis. 2, 315-319 (1993).
123. Ramirez, M. L., Wong, M., Sadler, N. & Shah, P. M. Doppler evaluation of bioprosthetic and mechanical aortic valves: data from four models in 107 stable, ambulatory patients. Am. Heart J. 115, 418-425 (1988). (Pubitemid 18043289)
124. Habib, G. et al. Contribution of Doppler echocardiography in the evaluation of normal and pathologic aortic valve prosthesis [French]. Arch. Mal. Coeur Vaiss. 83, 937-945 (1990). (Pubitemid 20191115)
125. Chakraborty, B., Quek, S., Pin, D. Z., Siong, C. T. & Kheng, T. L. Doppler echocardiographic assessment of normally functioning Starr-Edwards, carbo medics and Carpentier-Edwards valves in aortic position. Angiology 47, 481-489 (1996).
126. Bojar, R. M., Rastegar, H., Payne, D. D., Mack, C. A. & Schwartz, S. L. Clinical and hemodynamic performance of the 19-mm Carpentier-Edwards porcine bioprosthesis. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 56, 1141-1147 (1993). (Pubitemid 23337606)
127. Gibbs, J. L., Wharton, G. A. & Williams, G. J. Doppler echocardiographic characteristics of the Carpentier-Edwards xenograft. Eur. Heart J 7, 353-356 (1986). (Pubitemid 16120817)
128. McDonald, M. L. et al. Hemodynamic performance of small aortic valve bioprostheses: is there a difference? Ann. Thorac. Surg. 63, 362-366 (1997). (Pubitemid 27084553)
129. Mullany, C. J., Schaff, H. V., Orszulak, T. A. & Miller, F. A. Early clinical and hemodynamic evaluation of the aortic intact porcine bioprosthesis. J. Heart Valve Dis. 3, 641-647 (1994). (Pubitemid 24354106)
130. Wiseth, R. et al. Hemodynamic evaluation by Doppler echocardiography of small (less than or equal to 21 mm) prostheses and bioprostheses in the aortic valve position. Am. J. Cardiol. 70, 240-246 (1992).
131. Cooper, D. M. et al. Evaluation of normal prosthetic valve function by Doppler echocardiography. Am. Heart J. 114, 576-582 (1987). (Pubitemid 17137401)
132. Lesbre, J. P. et al. Evaluation of new pericardial bioprostheses by pulsed and continuous Doppler ultrasound [French]. Arch. Mal. Coeur Vaiss. 79, 1439-1448 (1986). (Pubitemid 16006624)
133. Sagar, K. B., Wann, L. S., Paulsen, W. H. & Romhilt, D. W. Doppler echocardiographic evaluation of Hancock and Bjork-Shiley prosthetic values. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 7, 681-687 (1986). (Pubitemid 16164397)
134. David, T. E., Armstrong, S. & Sun, Z. Clinical and hemodynamic assessment of the Hancock II bioprosthesis. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 54, 661-667 (1992).
135. Eichinger, W. B. et al. The mosaic bioprosthesis in the aortic position: hemodynamic performance after 2 years. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 66, S126-S129 (1998). (Pubitemid 29087145)
136. Ius, P. et al. Hemodynamic evaluation of 23 mm Pericarbon and 23 mm Hancock II bioprostheses in the aortic position at mid-term follow up. J. Heart Valve Dis. 5, 656-661 (1996). (Pubitemid 26393699)
137. Bojar, R. M. et al. Clinical and hemodynamic performance of the Ionescu-Shiley valve in the small aortic root. Results in 117 patients with 17 and 19 mm valves. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 98, 1087-1095 (1989). (Pubitemid 20008605)
138. Simpson, I. A. et al. Non-invasive assessment by Doppler ultrasound of 155 patients with bioprosthetic valves: a comparison of the Wessex porcine, low profile Ionescu-Shiley, and Hancock pericardial bioprostheses. Br. Heart J. 56, 83-88 (1986). (Pubitemid 16064097)
139. Gonzalez-Juanatey, J. R. et al. The influence of the design on the medium to long-term hemodynamic behavior of 19 mm pericardial aortic valve prostheses. J. Heart Valve Dis. 5, S317-S323 (1996). (Pubitemid 26393625)
140. Bojar, R. M. et al. Clinical and hemodynamic performance of the Ionescu-Shiley valve in the small aortic root. Results in 117 patients with 17 and 19 mm valves. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 98, 1087-1095 (1989). (Pubitemid 20008605)
141. Cartier, P. C. et al. Clinical and hemodynamic performance of the Freestyle aortic root bioprosthesis. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 67, 345-349 (1999).
142. Baur, L. H. et al. Echocardiographic parameters of the freestyle stentless bioprosthesis in aortic position: the European experience. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 12, 729-735 (1999). (Pubitemid 29444420)
143. Yun, K. L. et al. Prosthesis-patient mismatch: hemodynamic comparison of stented and stentless aortic valves. Semin. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 11, 98-102 (1999).
144. Dumesnil, J. G. et al. Hemodynamic features of the freestyle aortic bioprosthesis compared with stented bioprosthesis. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 66, S130-S133 (1998). (Pubitemid 29087146)
145. Dagenais, F. et al. A single center experience with the freestyle bioprosthesis: midterm results at the Quebec Heart Institute. Semin. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 13, 156-162 (2001). (Pubitemid 34110761)
146. Yun, K. L. et al. Aortic valve replacement with the freestyle stentless bioprosthesis: five-year experience. Circulation 100, II17-II23 (1999). (Pubitemid 29523504)
147. Kappetein, A. P. et al. Outcome and follow-up of aortic valve replacement with the freestyle stentless bioprosthesis. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 71, 601-607 (2001).
148. Baur, L. H. et al. Echocardiographic parameters of the freestyle stentless bioprosthesis in aortic position: the European experience. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 12, 729-735 (1999). (Pubitemid 29444420)
149. Del Rizzo, D. F. & Abdoh, A. Clinical and hemodynamic comparison of the Medtronic Freestyle and Toronto SPV stentless valves. J. Card. Surg. 13, 398-407 (1998). (Pubitemid 29325892)
150. Fries, R., Wendler, O., Schieffer, H. & Schafers, H. J. Comparative rest and exercise hemodynamics of 23-mm stentless versus 23-mm stented aortic bioprostheses. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 69, 817-822 (2000). (Pubitemid 30184702)
151. Jaffe, W. M. et al. Early follow-up of patients with the Medtronic Intact porcine valve. A new cardiac bioprosthesis. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 98, 181-192 (1989). (Pubitemid 19198521)
152. Etienne, Y. et al. Evaluation of the normal bioprosthetic Intact aortic valve by Doppler echocardiography [French]. Arch. Mal. Coeur Vaiss. 83, 2039-2044 (1990).
153. Ricou, F., Brun, A. & Lerch, R. Hemodynamic comparison of Medtronic intact bioprostheses and bileaflet mechanical prostheses in aortic position. Cardiology 87, 212-215 (1996). (Pubitemid 26108377)
154. Dumesnil, J. G., Honos, G. N., Lemieux, M. & Beauchemin, J. Validation and applications of indexed aortic prosthetic valve areas calculated by Doppler echocardiography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 16, 637-643 (1990). (Pubitemid 20296128)
155. Thomson, D. J. et al. Medtronic mosaic porcine bioprosthesis satisfactory early clinical performance. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 66, S122-S125 (1998). (Pubitemid 29087144)
156. Jamieson, W. R., Janusz, M. T., MacNab, J. & Henderson, C. Hemodynamic comparison of second- and third-generation stented bioprostheses in aortic valve replacement. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 71, S282-S284 (2001). (Pubitemid 32436980)
157. Eichinger, W. et al. The Mosaic bioprosthesis in the aortic position at five years. J. Heart Valve Dis. 9, 653-660 (2000).
158. Corbineau, H., Lelong, B., Langanay, T., Verhoye, J. P. & Leguerrier, A. Echocardiographic assessment and preliminary clinical results after aortic valve replacement with the Medtronic Mosaic bioprosthesis. J. Heart Valve Dis. 10, 171-176 (2001). (Pubitemid 32248670)
159. Fradet, G. J., Bleese, N., Burgess, J. & Cartier, P. C. Mosaic valve international clinical trial: early performance results. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 71, S273-S277 (2001). (Pubitemid 32436978)
160. Fradet, G. et al. The mosaic valve clinical performance at seven years: results from a multicenter prospective clinical trial. J. Heart Valve Dis. 13, 239-246 (2004).
161. Yun, K. L. et al. Prosthesis-patient mismatch: hemodynamic comparison of stented and stentless aortic valves. Semin. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 11, 98-102 (1999).
162. Wong, S. P. et al. Early experience with the mosaic bioprosthesis: a new generation porcine valve. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 69, 1846-1850 (2000). (Pubitemid 30445532)
163. Gansera, B. et al. The Mosaic bioprosthesis in the aortic position: seven years' results. J. Heart Valve Dis. 12, 354-361 (2003). (Pubitemid 36675649)
164. Nardi, C., Scioti, G., Milano, A. D., De, C. M. & Bortolotti, U. Hemodynamic assessment of the Medtronic Mosaic bioprosthesis in the aortic position. J. Heart Valve Dis. 10, 100-104 (2001). (Pubitemid 32104472)
165. Milano, A. D. et al. Hemodynamic performance of stented and stentless aortic bioprostheses. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 72, 33-38 (2001). (Pubitemid 32655023)
166. Eichinger, W. B. et al. Exercise hemodynamics of bovine versus porcine bioprostheses: a prospective randomized comparison of the mosaic and perimount aortic valves. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 129, 1056-1063 (2005). (Pubitemid 40631426)
167. Habib, G. et al. Contribution of Doppler echocardiography to the evaluation and monitoring of normal and pathologic mitral valve prostheses [French]. Arch. Mal. Coeur Vaiss. 83, 469-477 (1990). (Pubitemid 20114650)