Literature DB >> 11016310

Survival advantage of stentless aortic bioprostheses.

S Westaby1, M Horton, X Y Jin, T Katsumata, O Ahmed, S Saito, H H Li, G L Grunkemeier.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bioprostheses (BPs) are used to avoid anticoagulation after aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients over 65 years of age. Stentless BPs offer established hemodynamic benefits. We sought to determine whether these advantages translate into improved survival.
METHODS: Between 1993 and 1997, follow-up data (for Food and Drug Administration submission) were collected prospectively for 160 consecutive, unselected hospital survivors who received the Freestyle valve (FS). Equivalent data were collected for 247 Carpentier-Edwards (CE) porcine xenograft patients. Detailed comparative statistical analysis was used to compare events and survival between the groups. Follow-up was 100% complete for the FS (5.2 years maximum; mean 3.2+/-1.0 years) group and 98% (7.2 years maximum; mean 3.8+/-2.0 years) for CE.
RESULTS: The groups were well matched in age (FS, 73+/-6 years; CE, 74+/-6 years), gender (FS, 58% male; CE, 62% male), ventricular function, and number of patients requiring coronary grafts (FS, 41%; CE, 37%). Actuarial survival at 5 years was 84% for FS versus 69% for CE (p = 0.023 Kaplan Meier, p = 0.009 Cox). Annual mortality rates were 3.6% for FS versus 7.1% for CE (p = 0.001). Thromboembolic rate was 0.8% per year for FS and 2.4% for CE (p = 0.024) without a difference in cardiac rhythm. Incidence of nonstructural dysfunction (paravalvular leak) was 0.2% for FS versus 1.3% for CE (p = 0.020).
CONCLUSIONS: By 5 years, the stentless valve patients had improved survival and reduced adverse events. Though differences in durability are yet to be proved, our findings support the use of stentless bioprostheses in this age group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11016310     DOI: 10.1016/s0003-4975(00)01736-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg        ISSN: 0003-4975            Impact factor:   4.330


  9 in total

1.  A nineteen-millimetre aortic valve prosthesis: is this really a risk?

Authors:  P Lipiec; L Noyez; R M H J Brouwer
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 2.380

2.  [Risk of perioperative mortality and complications following biological aortic valve replacement in elderly patients: stented vs unstented bioprotheses].

Authors:  J Ennker; I Florath; U Rosendahl; S Bauer; E von Hodenberg; I C Ennker
Journal:  Z Kardiol       Date:  2001-12

3.  Mid term outcome and quality of life after aortic valve replacement in elderly people: mechanical versus stentless biological valves.

Authors:  I Florath; A Albert; U Rosendahl; T Alexander; I C Ennker; J Ennker
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 5.994

4.  Comparison of outcomes after aortic valve replacement with a mechanical valve or a bioprosthesis using microsimulation.

Authors:  J P A Puvimanasinghe; J J M Takkenberg; M B Edwards; M J C Eijkemans; E W Steyerberg; L A Van Herwerden; K M Taylor; G L Grunkemeier; J D F Habbema; A J J C Bogers
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 5.  Heart valve replacement: which valve for which patient?

Authors:  Joseph Huh; Faisal Bakaeen
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 6.  Stentless aortic valve replacement: an update.

Authors:  Junjiro Kobayashi
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2011-06-02

Review 7.  Aortic valve replacement and prosthesis-patient mismatch in the era of trans-catheter aortic valve implantation.

Authors:  Shigeki Morita
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2016-05-27

8.  Influence of the tilt angle of Percutaneous Aortic Prosthesis on Velocity and Shear Stress Fields

Authors:  Bruno Alvares de Azevedo Gomes; Gabriel Cordeiro Camargo; Jorge Roberto Lopes Dos Santos; Luis Fernando Alzuguir Azevedo; Ângela Ourivio Nieckele; Aristarco Gonçalves Siqueira-Filho; Glaucia Maria Moraes de Oliveira
Journal:  Arq Bras Cardiol       Date:  2017 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.000

9.  A propensity matched analysis of outcomes and long term survival in stented versus stentless valves.

Authors:  Blake N Shultz; Tomasz Timek; Alan T Davis; John Heiser; Edward Murphy; Charles Willekes; Robert Hooker
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 1.637

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.