Literature DB >> 1417224

Stentless porcine and pericardial valve in aortic position.

R Casabona1, R De Paulis, G F Zattera, M di Summa, W Bottone, C Stacchino, M O Vrandecic, M Morea.   

Abstract

Fifty-seven patients underwent aortic valve replacement with a stentless glutaraldehyde-fixed bioprosthesis; 27 received a porcine aortic valve and 30 had a bovine pericardial valve. Two groups of 30 patients each who had aortic valve replacement with a tilting-disc mechanical valve or a stented porcine bioprosthesis served as controls. There were no differences in sex, body surface area, valve lesion, and valve size among the four groups. Results were assessed on a Doppler-based determination of maximum velocity across the valve, aortic valve area, and degree of valve regurgitation. Velocity across the valve was significantly less with stentless pericardial valves than with stentless porcine valves, stented bioprostheses, and mechanical valves. Stentless valves had a significantly larger aortic valve area when compared with stented valves. Mild central aortic insufficiency was detected more often with stentless pericardial than with stentless porcine bioprostheses (p = 0.04). Stentless valves showed a higher incidence of complete atrioventricular block when compared with stented valves (p = 0.04). Long-term studies are now warranted to assess the durability of both types of stentless valves.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1417224     DOI: 10.1016/0003-4975(92)91011-w

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


  1 in total

Review 1.  Aortic valve replacement: is porcine or bovine valve better?

Authors:  Kok Hooi Yap; Ralph Murphy; Mohan Devbhandari; Rajamiyer Venkateswaran
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2012-12-04
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.