Literature DB >> 10888098

Comparison of On-X and SJM HP bileaflet aortic valves.

T Walther1, V Falk, R Tigges, M Krüger, G Langebartels, A Diegeler, R Autschbach, F W Mohr.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The study aim was to evaluate the hemodynamic function after aortic valve replacement (AVR) using the On-X valve, in comparison with St. Jude Medical (SJM) HP bileaflet valves.
METHODS: Patients received either the On-X (n = 20) or SJM HP prosthesis (n = 20) for AVR. The control (SJM HP) group was computer-matched with the On-X group for age, gender, aortic stenosis as underlying disease, body surface area, NYHA functional class, left ventricular size, mass and function, transvalvular pressure gradients and cardiac index. Mean implanted valve size was 23.5 mm (three 21 mm, ten 23 mm, six 25 mm, one 27 mm) in both groups. All patients underwent postoperative, and six- and 12-month follow up echocardiography.
RESULTS: The intra- and postoperative course was uneventful in all patients. There were no significant differences in cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times, intensive care unit stay, in-hospital stay and postoperative NYHA functional class. Two patients (both On-X) had paravalvular leakage postoperatively and at follow up. Five patients in the control group had additional myocardial revascularization. Transvalvular flow velocities were 2.38 +/- 0.3 versus 2.38 +/- 0.4 m/s (p = NS) postoperatively, and 2.08 +/- 0.2 versus 2.22 +/- 0.3 m/s (p = NS) at one year follow up for On-X and SJM HP valves, respectively. Maximum pressure gradients were 16.9 +/- 6.0 versus 18.5 +/- 8.0 mmHg (p = NS) postoperatively and 14.0 +/- 3.7 versus 16.5 +/- 5.7 mmHg (p = NS) at one year for the two valve types, respectively. A relatively pronounced transvalvular reflux was diagnosed for On-X valves.
CONCLUSION: At one year after implantation, the On-X bileaflet prosthesis is equally suited for AVR in comparison with the 'standard' therapy (SJM HP). Exact sizing requires some experience. There were no significant differences between the two prostheses with regard to hemodynamic parameters either postoperatively or at one-year follow up. Long-term prospective randomized studies yet have to be carried out.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10888098

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Heart Valve Dis        ISSN: 0966-8519


  4 in total

1.  Anticoagulation dilemma in a high-risk patient with On-X valves.

Authors:  Ami M Karkar; Manuel R Castresana; Nadine Odo; Shvetank Agarwal
Journal:  Ann Card Anaesth       Date:  2015 Apr-Jun

2.  Early Hemodynamic Profile after Aortic Valve Replacement - A Comparison between Three Mechanical Valves.

Authors:  Khaled D Algarni; Essam Hassan; Amr A Arafat; Mostafa A Shalaby; Hussein H Elawad; Claudio Pragliola; Turki B Albacker
Journal:  Braz J Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2021-02-01

3.  Flow dynamics of surgical and transcatheter aortic valves: Past to present.

Authors:  Hoda Hatoum; Sunyoung Ahn; Scott Lilly; Pablo Maureira; Juan Crestanello; Vinod H Thourani; Lakshmi Prasad Dasi
Journal:  JTCVS Open       Date:  2022-01-24

4.  On-X versus St Jude Medical Regent mechanical aortic valve prostheses: early haemodynamics.

Authors:  Robert Xu; Mohammad Rahnavardi; Bradley Pitman; Masoumeh Shirazi; Robert Stuklis; James Edwards; Michael Worthington
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2017-02-23
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.