HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Bortolotti, U. Articles by Gallucci, V. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bortolotti, U. Articles by Gallucci, V.

The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol 52, 84-91, Copyright © 1991 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

ARTICLES

Influence of type of prosthesis on late results after combined mitral- aortic valve replacement

U Bortolotti, A Milano, L Testolin, V Tursi, A Mazzucco and V Gallucci
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Padova Medical School, Italy.

The influence of type of prosthesis on the late outcome of patients with combined mitral-aortic valve replacement was analyzed by comparing, at a 14-year follow-up, patients receiving two biological prostheses (group 1; n = 135), two mechanical prostheses (group 2; n = 221), or a mechanical prosthesis in the aortic position and a bioprosthesis in the mitral position (group 3; n = 97). No difference was found among the three groups in terms of actuarial survival and incidence of and freedom from valve-related deaths, thromboemboli, and hemorrhages. Patients with biological prostheses had a significantly greater incidence of structural valve deterioration, reoperations, and overall complications when compared with patients with only mechanical prostheses. The results of an extended follow-up of patients with combined mitral-aortic valve replacement indicate that mechanical prostheses perform better in the long-term owing to their superior durability when compared with biological valves. The use of bioprostheses should be confined to old patients with limited life expectancy because of their cardiac disease, provided that anticoagulants are not used. Combination of mechanical and biological prostheses in the same patient should be avoided because the advantages of each type of prosthesis are lost.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				H. V. Schaff and R. M. Suri Multiple Valve Disease Card. Surg. Adult, January 1, 2008; 3(2008): 1129 - 1158. [Full Text]

				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]

				H. V. Schaff and D. H. Marsh Multiple Valve Disease Card. Surg. Adult, January 1, 2003; 2(2003): 1017 - 1045. [Full Text]

				C. Huth, A. Friedl, A. Rost, and for the GELIA Study Investigator Group Intensity of oral anticoagulation after implantation of St. Jude Medical aortic prosthesis: analysis of the GELIA Database (GELIA 4) Eur. Heart J. Suppl., December 1, 2001; 3(suppl_Q): Q33 - Q38. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Caus, P. Rouviere, F. Collart, A. Mouly-Bandini, J.-R. Monties, and T. Mesana Late results of double-valve replacement with biologic or mechanical prostheses Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2001; 71 (2007): S261 - S264. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. John, E. Ravikumar, C. N. John, and V. V. Bashi 25-year experience with 456 combined mitral and aortic valve replacement for rheumatic heart disease Ann. Thorac. Surg., April 1, 2000; 69(4): 1167 - 1172. [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]