Mechanical versus bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement in patients <65 years old

Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Volumn 147, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 117-126

  Kaneko, Tsuyoshi ^a   Aranki, Sary ^a   Javed, Quratulain ^a   McGurk, Siobhan ^a   Shekar, Prem ^a   Davidson, Michael ^a   Cohn, Lawrence ^a  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; BIOPROSTHESIS; BLEEDING; CATHETER VALVE; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMBOLISM; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MECHANICAL HEART VALVE; MITRAL VALVE REPLACEMENT; MORTALITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHETIC VALVE DYSFUNCTION; REOPERATION; SURGICAL MORTALITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

35.4.2; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS; EMRS; MITRAL VALVE REPLACEMENT; MVR; STRUCTURAL VALVE DETERIORATION; SVD; TMVR; TRANSCATHETER MITRAL VALVE REPLACEMENT; VALVE-IN-VALVE; VIV;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; BIOPROSTHESIS; FEMALE; HEART VALVE DISEASES; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; HUMANS; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MITRAL VALVE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PATIENT SELECTION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROPENSITY SCORE; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK FACTORS; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84890564240     PISSN: 00225223     EISSN: 1097685X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.08.028     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (21)

1. J.S. Gammie, S. Sheng, B.P. Griffith, E.D. Peterson, J.S. Rankin, and S.M. O'Brien Trends in mitral valve surgery in the United States: results from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Database Ann Thorac Surg 87 2009 1431 1439
2. T. Kaneko, L.C. Cohn, and S.F. Aranki Tissue valve is the preferred option for patients aged 60 and older Circulation 128 2013 1365 1371
3. R.O. Bonow, B.A. Carabello, K. Chatterjee, A.C. de Leon, D.P. Faxon, and M.D. Freed ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease Circulation 114 2006 e84 231
4. A. Vahanian, O. Alfieri, F. Andreotti, M.J. Antunes, G. Baron-Esquivias, and H. Baumgartner Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease Eur Heart J 33 2012 2451 2496
5. H. Oxenham, P. Bloomfield, D.J. Wheatley, R.J. Lee, J. Cunningham, and R.J. Prescott Twenty years comparison of a Bjork-Shiley mechanical heart valve with porcine bioprostheses Heart 89 2003 715 721
6. K. Hammermeister, G.K. Sethi, W.G. Henderson, F.L. Grover, C. Oprian, and S.H. Rahimtoola 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 2000 1152 1158
7. R.G. Masters, M. Haddad, A.L. Pipe, J.P. Veinot, and T. Mesana Clinical outcomes with the Hancock II bioprosthetic valve Ann Thorac Surg 78 2004 832 836
8. W.R. Jamieson, O. von Lipinski, R.T. Miyagishima, L.H. Burr, M.T. Janusz, and H. Ling Performance of bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses assessed by composites of valve-related complications to 15 years after mitral valve replacement J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 129 2005 1301 1308
9. A.J. Berrebi, S.M. Carpentier, K.P. Phan, V.P. Nguyen, S.M. Chauvaud, and A. Carpentier Results of up to 9 years of high-temperature-fixed valvular bioprostheses in a young population Ann Thorac Surg 71 5 Suppl 2001 S353 S355
10. M. Ruel, V. Chan, P. Bedard, A. Kulik, L. Ressler, and K. Lam Very long-term survival implications of heart valve replacement with tissue versus mechanical prostheses in adults <60 years of age Circulation 116 2007 S294 S300
11. A. Kulik, P. Bedard, B.K. Lam, F.D. Rubens, P.J. Hendry, and R.G. Masters Mechanical versus bioprosthetic valve replacements in middle-aged patients Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 30 2006 485 491
12. Y.Y. Cen, D.D. Glower, K. Landolfo, J.E. Lowe, R.D. Davis, and W.G. Wolfe Comparison of survival after mitral valve replacement with biologic and mechanical valves in 1139 patients J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 122 2001 569 577
13. W.R. Jamieson, V.M. Gudas, L.H. Burr, M.T. Janusz, G.J. Fradet, and H. Ling Mitral valve disease: if the mitral valve is not reparable/failed repair, is bioprosthesis suitable for replacement? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 35 2009 104 110
14. P.S. Myken Seventeen-year experience with the St. Jude Medical Biocor porcine bioprosthesis J Heart Valve Dis 14 2005 486 492
15. D.D. Potter, T.M. Sundt III, K.J. Zehr, J.A. Dearani, R.C. Daly, and C.J. Mullany Risk of repeat mitral valve replacement for failed mitral valve prostheses Ann Thorac Surg 78 2004 67 72
16. W.R. Jamieson, L.H. Burr, R.T. Miyagishima, M.T. Janusz, G.J. Fradet, and S.V. Lichtenstein Reoperation for bioprosthetic mitral structural failure: risk assessment Circulation 108 2003 S98 S102
17. L.H. Cohn, S.F. Aranki, R.J. Rizzo, D.H. Adams, K.A. Cogswell, and N.M. Kinchla Decrease in operative risk of reoperative valve surgery Ann Thorac Surg 56 1993 15 20
18. V. Badhwar, J.C. Ofenloch, J.D. Rovin, H.M. van Gelder, and J.P. Jacobs Noninferiority of closely monitored mechanical valves to bioprostheses overshadowed by early mortality benefit in younger patients Ann Thorac Surg 93 2012 748 753
19. P. Stassano, L. DiTommaso, M. Monaco, F. Iorio, P. Pepino, and N. Spampinato Aortic valve replacement: a prospective randomized evaluation of mechanical versus biological valves in patients ages 55 to 70 years J Am Coll Cardiol 54 2009 1862 1868
20. S.H. Rahimtoola Choice of prosthetic heart valve in adults: an update J Am Coll Cardiol 55 2010 2413 2426
21. W.R. Jamieson, R.T. Miyagishima, G.L. Grunkemeier, E. Germann, C. Henderson, and S.V. Lichtenstein Bileaflet mechanical prostheses for aortic valve replacement in patients younger than 65 years and 65 years of age or older: major thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications Can J Surg 42 1999 27 36