|
|
||||||||
The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol 44, 139-144, Copyright © 1987 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons
U Bortolotti, A Milano, G Thiene, F Guerra, A Mazzucco, E Talenti and V Gallucci
Long-term evaluation of patients undergoing combined mitral and aortic
valve replacement (MVR + AVR) with a porcine bioprosthesis provides the
opportunity for a direct comparison of the durability of the mitral versus
the aortic porcine bioprosthesis in the same patient. From 1970 to 1983, 71
patients underwent MVR + AVR with Hancock porcine bioprostheses. There were
46 men an 25 women ranging in age from 21 to 64 years (mean, 47.5 +/- 5
years). Sixteen patients (22.5%) died at operation. The survivors were
followed from 0.2 to 11.5 years (mean, 5.7 +/- 3 years). Duration of
follow-up was 313 patient-years and was 100% complete. Overall late
mortality was 6.7 +/- 1.4% per patient-year (linearized incidence), and
actuarial survival was 54.2 +/- 8% at 11 years. Endocarditis occurred in 4
patients (linearized incidence of 1.3 +/- 0.6% per patient-year);
thromboembolic events were sustained by 4 patients (linearized incidence of
1.3 +/- 0.6% per patient-year); the event was fatal in 1 patient. Actuarial
freedom from thromboembolism was 90 +/- 4.8% at 11 years. Reoperation for
primary tissue failure was performed in 11 patients (linearized incidence
of 3.5 +/- 1% per patient-year) with no deaths; in 7 patients both
bioprostheses were explanted, and in 4, only the mitral bioprosthesis was
replaced. The durability of explanted aortic and mitral porcine
bioprostheses was not significantly different, and the evaluation of seven
pairs of explanted aortic and mitral bioprostheses showed similar amounts
of calcification. Actuarial freedom from reoperation because of primary
tissue failure was 44.6 +/- 13.7% at 11 years.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250
WORDS)
ARTICLES
Long-term durability of the Hancock porcine bioprosthesis following combined mitral and aortic valve replacement: an 11-year experience
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
G. Rizzoli, S. Mirone, P. Ius, E. Polesel, T. Bottio, L. Salvador, C. Zussa, G. Gerosa, and C. Valfre Fifteen-year results with the Hancock II valve: A multicenter experience. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., September 1, 2006; 132(3): 602 - 609.e4. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. M. Gillinov, E. H. Blackstone, D. M. Cosgrove III, J. White, P. Kerr, A. Marullo, P. M. McCarthy, and B. W. Lytle Mitral valve repair with aortic valve replacement is superior to double valve replacement J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., June 1, 2003; 125(6): 1372 - 1387. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
U. Bortolotti, A. Milano, G. Thiene, and A. Mazzucco Original expectations of the Hancock valve and 20 years of clinical reality Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., January 1, 1992; 6(suppl_1): S75 - S78. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |