Literature DB >> 19892237

Aortic valve replacement: a prospective randomized evaluation of mechanical versus biological valves in patients ages 55 to 70 years.

Paolo Stassano1, Luigi Di Tommaso, Mario Monaco, Francesco Iorio, Paolo Pepino, Nicola Spampinato, Carlo Vosa.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine long-term results between bioprosthetic (BP) and mechanical (MP) aortic valves in middle-aged patients.
BACKGROUND: It has not been established which is the best aortic valve substitute in patients ages 55 to 70 years. We conducted a randomized study to compare long-term outcomes between BP and MP aortic valves.
METHODS: Between January 1995 and June 2003, 310 patients were randomized to receive a BP or an MP aortic valve. Primary end points of the study were survival, valve failure, and reoperation.
RESULTS: One hundred fifty-five patients received a BP valve, and 155 patients received an MP valve. Four patients died, perioperatively, in the MP group (2.6%), and 6 patients died in the BP group (3.9%, p = 0.4). At late follow-up (mean 106 +/- 28 months) 41 patients died in the MP group and 45 patients died in the BP group (p = 0.6). There was no difference in the survival rate at 13 years between the MP and BP groups. Valve failures and reoperations were more frequent in the BP group compared with the MP group (p = 0.0001 and p = 0.0003, respectively). There were no differences in the linearized rate of thromboembolism, bleeding, endocarditis, and major adverse prosthesis-related events (MAPE) between the MP and BP valve groups.
CONCLUSIONS: At 13 years, patients undergoing aortic valve replacement either with MP or BP valves had a similar survival rate as well the same rate of occurrence of thromboembolism, bleeding, endocarditis, and MAPE, but patients who had undergone aortic valve replacement with BP valves faced a significantly higher risk of valve failure and reoperation. 2009 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19892237     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.07.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  37 in total

1.  Tissue-type plasminogen activator gene targets thrombolysis in atriums.

Authors:  Yongsheng Gong; Fajiu Wang; Xia Li; Zhixin Gao; Kailun Zhang; Chen Fan; Xingen Liu
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 2.  Prosthetic valve selection for middle-aged patients with aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Joanna Chikwe; Farzan Filsoufi; Alain F Carpentier
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 3.  Safety and Use of Anticoagulation After Aortic Valve Replacement With Bioprostheses: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Haris Riaz; Shehab Ahmad Redha Alansari; Muhammad Shahzeb Khan; Talha Riaz; Sajjad Raza; Faraz Khan Luni; Abdur Rahman Khan; Irbaz Bin Riaz; Richard A Krasuski
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2016-05-10

4.  Long-Term Outcome of Prosthetic Valve Replacement in Japanese Patients Aged 65 Years or Older: Are Guidelines for Prosthetic Valve Selection Based on Overseas Data Appropriate for Japanese Patients?

Authors:  Akira Sezai; Shunji Osaka; Hiroko Yaoita; Yusuke Ishii; Munehito Arimoto; Hiroaki Hata; Motomi Shiono
Journal:  Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2015-05-25       Impact factor: 1.520

5.  Anticoagulant independent mechanical heart valves: viable now or still a distant holy grail.

Authors:  Aurelio Chaux; Richard J Gray; Jonathan C Stupka; Michael R Emken; Lawrence N Scotten; Rolland Siegel
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-12

6.  Aortic valve replacement in young patients: should the biological prosthesis be recommended over the mechanical?

Authors:  Alberto Alperi; Daniel Hernandez-Vaquero; Isaac Pascual; Rocio Diaz; Iria Silva; Ruben Alvarez-Cabo; Pablo Avanzas; Cesar Moris
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-05

Review 7.  Selection of prosthetic valve and evidence--need for the development of Japan's own guidelines.

Authors:  Akira Sezai; Motomi Shiono
Journal:  Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 1.520

8.  Choice of prosthetic heart valve in a developing country.

Authors:  Shiv Kumar Choudhary; Sachin Talwar; Balram Airan
Journal:  Heart Asia       Date:  2016-04-28

9.  Hemodynamic Performance and Thrombogenic Properties of a Superhydrophobic Bileaflet Mechanical Heart Valve.

Authors:  David L Bark; Hamed Vahabi; Hieu Bui; Sanli Movafaghi; Brandon Moore; Arun K Kota; Ketul Popat; Lakshmi P Dasi
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2016-04-20       Impact factor: 3.934

10.  Choice of Aortic Valve Prosthesis in a Rapidly Aging and Long-Living Society.

Authors:  Yoshimasa Sakamoto; Michio Yoshitake; Yoko Matsumura; Hitomi Naruse; Ko Bando; Kazuhiro Hashimoto
Journal:  Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2016-09-12       Impact factor: 1.520

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.