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

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) 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 Author home page(s): Michael T. Janusz Robert T. Miyagishima Guy J. Fradet Samuel V. Lichtenstein Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Jamieson, W.R. E. Articles by Stewart, K. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Jamieson, W.R. E. Articles by Stewart, K. M.

Ann Thorac Surg 1999;67:10-17
© 1999 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

---

Original Articles

Carpentier-Edwards standard and supraannular porcine bioprostheses: comparison of technology

^a Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Address reprint requests to Dr Jamieson, 3100-910 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, Canada V5Z 4E3

Presented at the Thirty-fourth Annual Meeting of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, New Orleans, LA, Jan 26–28, 1998.

Background. Performance with regard to structural valve deterioration (SVD) with the Carpentier-Edwards standard (CE-S) and supraannular (CE-SAV) (Baxter Healthcare Corp, Irvine, CA) porcine bioprostheses was evaluated to determine whether progress in reduction of structural failure has been achieved with technological changes.

Methods. The CE-S was implanted during 567 aortic valve replacement (AVR) and 486 mitral valve replacement (MVR) procedures, and the CE-SAV was implanted during 1,670 AVR and 1,096 MVR procedures. The failure mode of early stent dehiscence with the CE-SAV prosthesis, thought to be controlled by manufacturing changes in 1986 and 1987, supported comparison of the CE-SAV with censored cases of stent dehiscence. Stent dehiscence accounted for only 1.2% (1 of 81) and 14.1% (29 of 205) of AVR and MVR CE-SAV failures, respectively.

Results. The only difference for AVR for freedom from SVD occurred in the 21- to 40-year age group at 15 years and was 68% for the CE-SAV and 31% for the CE-S (p < 0.05). In the 61- to 70-year age group, freedom from SVD at 15 years was 76% for the CE-S and 84% for the CE-SAV; for the 71-year or higher age group, freedom from SVD was 89% and 95%, respectively (p = NS). For MVR freedom from SVD was different only in the 71-year or higher age group and was 90% for the CE-S and 59% for the CE-SAV (p < 0.05). Freedom from SVD was reduced but was similar (p = NS) for the other age groups. For AVR the actual freedom from SVD at 15 years for the CE-S and CE-SAV was, respectively, 79% and 72% for the 51- to 60-year age group, 86% and 91% for the 61- to 70-year age group, and 98% and 98% for the 71-year or higher age group. For MVR, these rates were, respectively, 69% and 75% for the 61- to 70-year age group and 96% and 89% for the 71-year and higher age group.

Conclusions. The technologic advancements made in the second-generation CE-SAV bioprosthesis to reduce the incidence of structural failure have not uniformly been successful. The actual freedom from SVD provides evidence for implantation of porcine bioprostheses for AVR in age groups 61 to 70 years and 71 years or higher and for MVR in the age group 71 years or higher.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. Bottio, M. Valente, G. Rizzoli, V. Tarzia, G. Bisleri, E. Pettenazzo, G. Gerosa, and G. Thiene Commissural dehiscence: a rare and peculiar cause of porcine valve structural deterioration. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., November 1, 2006; 132(5): 1017 - 1022. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Rizzoli, T. Bottio, V. Vida, G. Nesseris, L. Caprili, G. Thiene, and G. Gerosa Intermediate results of isolated mitral valve replacement with a Biocor porcine valve J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., February 1, 2005; 129(2): 322 - 329. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Le Tourneau, A. Vincentelli, G. Fayad, C. Savoye, O. H. Fabre, A. Prat, and H. Warembourg Ten-year echocardiographic and clinical follow-up of aortic Carpentier-Edwards pericardial and supraannular prosthesis: a case-match study Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2002; 74(6): 2010 - 2015. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. R.A. Goldsmith, T. J. Spyt, M. Boehm, S. Kendall, and M. D. Rosin Midterm evaluation of the Tissuemed (Aspire) porcine bioprosthesis: 493 patients, 506 bioprostheses Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2001; 71(5): 1471 - 1476. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Corbineau, B. De La Tour, J.-P. Verhoye, T. Langanay, B. Lelong, and A. Leguerrier Carpentier-Edwards supraannular porcine bioprosthesis in aortic position: 16-year experience Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2001; 71 (2007): S228 - S231. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. A. Folliguet, E. Le Bret, J. Bachet, and F. Laborde Pericarbon pericardial bioprosthesis: an experience based on the lessons of the past Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2001; 71 (2007): S289 - S292. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. B. Doty, K. A. Dilip, and R. C. Millar Mitral valve replacement with homograft and Maze III procedure Ann. Thorac. Surg., March 1, 2000; 69(3): 739 - 742. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]