PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term results of aortic valve replacement (AVR) with mechanical (M) and bioprosthetic (B) valves as recommended by the Japanese guidelines. METHODS: From April 1995 to March 2014, 366 adult patients underwent AVR. Of these, 127 (35%) patients received M and 239 patients (65%) received B valves. A retrospective analysis of the entire and the selected 124 patients aged 60 to 70 years was carried out. RESULTS: In patients aged 60 to 70 years, the 15-year survival and freedom from reoperation were 88% ± 7% and 100% for the M group and 34% ± 25% (p <0.001) and 73% ± 14% (p = 0.059) for the B group, respectively. Among propensity score matching of the subgroup, there was no significant difference in survival and freedom from reoperation. The rate of thromboembolism was higher in the M (M: 0.58% vs B: 0.35% patient per year, p <0.001) and the rate of hemorrhage was higher in the M group (M: 0.34% vs B: 0.12% patient per year, p <0.001). CONCLUSION: The current strategy of aortic valve choice based on the Japanese guidelines has provided excellent long-term results so far.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term results of aortic valve replacement (AVR) with mechanical (M) and bioprosthetic (B) valves as recommended by the Japanese guidelines. METHODS: From April 1995 to March 2014, 366 adult patients underwent AVR. Of these, 127 (35%) patients received M and 239 patients (65%) received B valves. A retrospective analysis of the entire and the selected 124 patients aged 60 to 70 years was carried out. RESULTS: In patients aged 60 to 70 years, the 15-year survival and freedom from reoperation were 88% ± 7% and 100% for the M group and 34% ± 25% (p <0.001) and 73% ± 14% (p = 0.059) for the B group, respectively. Among propensity score matching of the subgroup, there was no significant difference in survival and freedom from reoperation. The rate of thromboembolism was higher in the M (M: 0.58% vs B: 0.35% patient per year, p <0.001) and the rate of hemorrhage was higher in the M group (M: 0.34% vs B: 0.12% patient per year, p <0.001). CONCLUSION: The current strategy of aortic valve choice based on the Japanese guidelines has provided excellent long-term results so far.
Authors: Cary W Akins; D Craig Miller; Marko I Turina; Nicholas T Kouchoukos; Eugene H Blackstone; Gary L Grunkemeier; Johanna J M Takkenberg; Tirone E David; Eric G Butchart; David H Adams; David M Shahian; Siegfried Hagl; John E Mayer; Bruce W Lytle Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Tsuyoshi Kaneko; Christina M Vassileva; Brian Englum; Sunghee Kim; Maroun Yammine; Matthew Brennan; Rakesh M Suri; Vinod H Thourani; Jeffrey P Jacobs; Sary Aranki Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2015-07-21 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Ali N Azadani; Nicolas Jaussaud; Peter B Matthews; Timothy A M Chuter; Liang Ge; T Sloane Guy; Julius Guccione; Elaine E Tseng Journal: J Heart Valve Dis Date: 2009-07
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
Authors: Danny Dvir; John G Webb; Sabine Bleiziffer; Miralem Pasic; Ron Waksman; Susheel Kodali; Marco Barbanti; Azeem Latib; Ulrich Schaefer; Josep Rodés-Cabau; Hendrik Treede; Nicolo Piazza; David Hildick-Smith; Dominique Himbert; Thomas Walther; Christian Hengstenberg; Henrik Nissen; Raffi Bekeredjian; Patrizia Presbitero; Enrico Ferrari; Amit Segev; Arend de Weger; Stephan Windecker; Neil E Moat; Massimo Napodano; Manuel Wilbring; Alfredo G Cerillo; Stephen Brecker; Didier Tchetche; Thierry Lefèvre; Federico De Marco; Claudia Fiorina; Anna Sonia Petronio; Rui C Teles; Luca Testa; Jean-Claude Laborde; Martin B Leon; Ran Kornowski Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 56.272