Literature DB >> 27326237

Choice of prosthetic heart valve in a developing country.

Shiv Kumar Choudhary1, Sachin Talwar1, Balram Airan1.   

Abstract

Mechanical prostheses and stented xenografts (bioprosthesis) are most commonly used substitutes for aortic and mitral valve replacement. The mechanical valves have the advantage of durability but are accompanied with the risk of thromboembolism, problems of long-term anticoagulation, and associated risk of bleeding. In contrast, bioprosthetic valves do not require long-term anticoagulation, but carry the risk of structural valve degeneration and re-operation. A mechanical valve is favoured in young patients (<40 years) if reliable anticoagulation is ensured. In elderly patients (>60 years), a bioprosthesis is a suitable substitute. In middle-aged patients (40-60 years), risk of re-operation in a bioprosthesis is equal to that of bleeding in a mechanical valve. Traditionally, a bioprosthesis is opted in patients with limited life expectancy. Calculation of life expectancy, based solely upon chronological age, is erroneous. In developing countries, the calculated life expectancy is much lower than that of Western population, hence age related Western cut-offs are not valid in developing countries. Besides age, cardiac condition of the patient, systemic illnesses, socio-economic status, gender and geographical location also decide the life expectancy of the patients. Selection of the prosthetic valve substitute should be based on: aspiration of the patient, life expectancy, socio-economic and educational background, occupation of the patient, availability, cost, monitoring of anti-coagulation, monitoring of valve function and other valve related complications, and possibility of re-operation.

Entities:  

Year:  2016        PMID: 27326237      PMCID: PMC4898620          DOI: 10.1136/heartasia-2015-010650

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart Asia        ISSN: 1759-1104


  62 in total

1.  Performance of bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses in age group 61-70 years.

Authors:  Kriengchai Prasongsukarn; W R Eric Jamieson; Samuel V Lichtenstein
Journal:  J Heart Valve Dis       Date:  2005-07

2.  Tissue valve is the preferred option for patients aged 60 and older.

Authors:  Tsuyoshi Kaneko; Lawrence H Cohn; Sary F Aranki
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Twenty-year follow-up of the Hancock modified orifice porcine aortic valve.

Authors:  L H Cohn; J J Collins; R J Rizzo; D H Adams; G S Couper; S F Aranki
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 4.330

4.  Predictors of the long-term outcome after combined aortic and mitral valve surgery.

Authors:  J Turina; T Stark; B Seifert; M Turina
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1999-11-09       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 5.  Choice of prosthetic heart valve in adults an update.

Authors:  Shahbudin H Rahimtoola
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-06-01       Impact factor: 24.094

6.  Durability of bioprosthetic cardiac valves.

Authors:  Grischa Hoffmann; Georg Lutter; Jochen Cremer
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2008-02-22       Impact factor: 5.594

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

Authors:  Paolo Stassano; Luigi Di Tommaso; Mario Monaco; Francesco Iorio; Paolo Pepino; Nicola Spampinato; Carlo Vosa
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 24.094

8.  Long-term relative survival rates after heart valve replacement.

Authors:  D Lindblom; U Lindblom; J Qvist; H Lundström
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1990-03-01       Impact factor: 24.094

9.  Twenty year comparison of a Bjork-Shiley mechanical heart valve with porcine bioprostheses.

Authors:  H Oxenham; P Bloomfield; D J Wheatley; R J Lee; J Cunningham; R J Prescott; H C Miller
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 5.994

10.  Re-operation for bioprosthetic aortic structural failure - risk assessment.

Authors:  W R E Jamieson; L H Burr; R T Miyagishima; M T Janusz; G J Fradet; H Ling; S V Lichtenstein
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.191

View more
  4 in total

1.  Mechanical prosthetic valve thrombosis in current era: 5-year follow-up.

Authors:  Supaksh Mahindru; Shantanu Pande; Pulkit Malhotra; Ankit Thukral; Ankush Singh Kotwal; Rajan Prasad Gupta; Naveen Garg; Aditya Kapoor; Surendra Kumar Agarwal
Journal:  Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2020-11-07

2.  Expanding Valve Repair in Rheumatic Heart Disease.

Authors:  Ahmed Afifi; Nairouz Shehata; Mohamed Nagi; Abdel Rahman Sultan; Magdi Yacoub
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-02-04

Review 3.  Perioperative management of patients with prosthetic heart valves-A narrative review.

Authors:  Soumya Sankar Nath; Samiksha Parashar
Journal:  Ann Card Anaesth       Date:  2022 Jul-Sep

4.  Continued use of Warfarin in lower dose has safe maternal and neonatal outcomes in pregnant women with Prosthetic Heart Valves.

Authors:  Shafaq Nadeem; Shabaz Ahmad Khilji; Faisal Ali; Anjum Jalal
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2021 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.088

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.