Literature DB >> 18179912

Aortic valve replacement with Toronto SPV bioprosthesis: optimal patient survival but suboptimal valve durability.

Tirone E David1, Christopher M Feindel, Joanne Bos, Joan Ivanov, Susan Armstrong.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to examine the clinical outcomes of aortic valve replacement with the Toronto SPV bioprosthesis at 12 years.
METHODS: The Toronto SPV was used for aortic valve replacement in 357 patients from July 1991 to December 2004. There were 244 men and 113 women with a mean age of 65 +/- 10 years. Aortic stenosis was present in 79% of patients, coronary artery disease in 38%, and left ventricular ejection fraction less than 0.40 in 12%. Patients had an annual assessment of valve function using echocardiography. The mean duration of follow-up was 7.7 +/- 3.2 years.
RESULTS: There were 2 operative and 79 late deaths, of which 13 were valve related and 25 heart related. Survival at 12 years was 64% +/- 4% and similar to that of the general population matched for age and sex. Forty-nine patients had echocardiographic evidence of bioprosthetic dysfunction. The freedom from structural valve degeneration at 12 years was 69% +/- 4% for all patients, 52% +/- 8% for patients less than 65 years of age, and 85% +/- 4% for patients 65 years of age or older (P = .002). Fifty patients had redo aortic valve replacement: 45 for structural valve degeneration and 5 for endocarditis. The freedom from redo aortic valve replacement at 12 years was 69% +/- 4%. Cusp tear with consequent aortic insufficiency was the most common cause of structural valve degeneration. At the latest follow-up contact, 226 (63%) patients were alive with the Toronto SPV valve in place, and 69% were in functional class I, 24% in class II, and 7% in class III.
CONCLUSIONS: The Toronto SPV bioprosthesis has provided optimal patient survival and symptomatic improvement but suboptimal valve durability, particularly in patients less than 65 years of age. We now use of this valve mostly in older patients who have a small aortic annulus.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18179912     DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.04.068

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0022-5223            Impact factor:   5.209


  12 in total

Review 1.  Durability of prostheses for transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Authors:  Mani Arsalan; Thomas Walther
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2016-04-07       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 2.  Cardiac surgery 2015 reviewed.

Authors:  Torsten Doenst; Constanze Strüning; Alexandros Moschovas; David Gonzalez-Lopez; Yasin Essa; Hristo Kirov; Mahmoud Diab; Gloria Faerber
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 5.460

Review 3.  Biological aortic valve replacement: advantages and optimal indications of stentless compared to stented valve substitutes. A review.

Authors:  Reza Tavakoli; Pichoy Danial; Ahmed Hamid Oudjana; Peiman Jamshidi; Max Gassmann; Pascal Leprince; Guillaume Lebreton
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2018-01-10

4.  Comparison of hemodynamic and clinical outcomes of transcatheter and sutureless aortic bioprostheses: how to make the right choice in intermediate risk patients.

Authors:  Augusto D'Onofrio; Assunta Fabozzo; Gino Gerosa
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2017-09

5.  10-Year Impact of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Leaflet Design (Intra- Versus Supra-Annular) in Mortality and Hemodynamic Performance.

Authors:  Andrea Scotti; Luca Nai Fovino; Augustin Coisne; Tommaso Fabris; Francesco Cardaioli; Mauro Massussi; Giulio Rodinò; Alberto Barolo; Mauro Boiago; Saverio Continisio; Carolina Montonati; Tommaso Sciarretta; Vittorio Zuccarelli; Valentina Bernardini; Giulia Masiero; Massimo Napodano; Chiara Fraccaro; Alfredo Marchese; Giovanni Esposito; Juan F Granada; Azeem Latib; Sabino Iliceto; Giuseppe Tarantini
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-06-08

Review 6.  Surgical treatment of aortic valve disease.

Authors:  Tirone E David
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2013-05-14       Impact factor: 32.419

7.  Characterization of immunogenic Neu5Gc in bioprosthetic heart valves.

Authors:  Eliran Moshe Reuven; Shani Leviatan Ben-Arye; Tal Marshanski; Michael E Breimer; Hai Yu; Imen Fellah-Hebia; Jean-Christian Roussel; Cristina Costa; Manuel Galiñanes; Rafael Mañez; Thierry Le Tourneau; Jean-Paul Soulillou; Emanuele Cozzi; Xi Chen; Vered Padler-Karavani
Journal:  Xenotransplantation       Date:  2016-09-09       Impact factor: 3.907

Review 8.  Stentless aortic valve replacement: an update.

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

Review 9.  Long-term Transcatheter Aortic Valve Durability.

Authors:  Giuliano Costa; Enrico Criscione; Denise Todaro; Corrado Tamburino; Marco Barbanti
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2019-05-21

Review 10.  Revisiting the guidelines and choice the ideal substitute for aortic valve endocarditis.

Authors:  Francesco Nappi; Sanjeet Singh Avtaar Singh; Cristiano Spadaccio; Christophe Acar
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.