Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Biological Valve Spectrum and a Rationale for Prosthetic Valve Choice

  • Chapter
Cardiac Reconstructions with Allograft Tissues

  • 656 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Hufnagel CA, Harvey WP. The surgical correction of aortic regurgitation: Preliminary report. Bulletin of Georgetown Univ Med Cntr 1953; 60.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hammermeister KE, Sethi GK, Henderson WG, Oprian C, Kim T, Rahimtoola SH. A comparison of outcomes in men 11 years after heart valve replacement with a mechanical or bioprosthesis. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study on Valvular Heart Disease. New Eng Journ Med 1993;328(18):1289–1296.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hall KV, Kaster RL, Wolfe WG. An improved pivotal disc-type prosthesis heart valve. Oslo City J Hosp 1979;29:3–21.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Nitter-Hauge S, Abdelnoor M. Ten-year experience with the Medtronic Hall valvular prosthesis. Circulation 1989;80(Suppl):43–48.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Akins C. Long-term results with the Medtronic-Hall valvular prosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 1996; 61:806–813.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Obadia JF, Martelloni YA, Bastien OH, Durant de Gevigney GM, et al. Long-term follow-up of small (20 and 21) Medtronic-Hall aortic valve prosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 1997;64:421–425.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bjork VO. A new tilting disc valve prosthesis. Scand J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1969;4:1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Wieting DW. The Bjork-Shiley Delrin tilting disc heart valve: historical perspective, design and need for scientific analysis after 25 years. J Heart Valve Dis 1996;5(Suppl):S157–S168.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mikaeloff P, Jegaden O, Ferrinin M, Coll-Mazzei J, et al. Prospective randomized study of St. Jude Medical versus Bjork-Shiley or Starr-Edwards 6120 valve prostheses in the mitral position. J Cardiovasc Surg 1989;30:966–975.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Flemma R, Mullen D, Kleinman L. Survival and event-free analysis of 785 patients with Bjork-Shiley spherical-disc valves at 10 to 16 years. Ann Thorac Surg 1988;45:258–265.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Birkmeyer J, Marrin C, O’Conner G. Should patients with Bjork-Shiley valves undergo prophylactic replacement? Lancet 1992;340:520.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rodler SM, Moritz A, Schreiner W, End A, Dubsky P, Wolner E. Five-year follow-up after valve replacement with the Carbomedics bileaflet prosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 1997;63:1018–1025.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kazui T, Yamada O, Yamagishi M, Watanabe N, Komatsu S. Aortic valve replacement with Omniscience and Omnicarbon valves. Ann Thorac Surg 1991;52:236–244.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kazui T, Komatsu S, Inoue N. Clinical evaluation of the Omniscience aortic disc valve prosthesis. Scand J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1987;21:173–188.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Jamieson W, Allen P, Miyagishima RT. Carpentier-Edwards standard porcine bioprosthesis: A first generation tissue valve with excellent longterm clinical performance. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1990;99:543–561.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Jamieson WRE, Munro AI, Miyagishima RT, et al. Carpentier-Edwards standard porcine bioprosthesis: Clinical performance to seventeen years. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:999–1007.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Carpentier A, Dubost C, Lane E et al. Continuing improvements in valvular bioprostheses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1982;83:27–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Jones E, Weintraub W, Craver J. Ten-year experience with the porcine bioprosthetic valve: interrelationship of valve survival and patient survival in 1,050 valve replacements. Ann Thorac Surg 1990;49:370–384.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Aberdeen J, Corr L, Milner P, Lincoln J, Burnstock G. Marked Increases in Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide-containing Nerves in the Developing Rat Following Long-term Sympathectomy with Guanethidine. Neuroscience 1990;35(1):175–184.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Hartz R, Fisher B, Finkelmeier B, et al. An eight year experience with porcine prosthetic cardiac valves. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1986;91:910–917.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Jamieson W, Burr LH, Tyers GF, Miyagishima RT, Janusz MT, et al. Carpentier-Edwards Supraannular Porcine Bioprosthesis: Clincal Performance to Twelve Years. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:S235–S240.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Glower DD, White W, Hattan A, et al. Determinants of reoperation after 960 valve replacements with Carpentier-Edwards prostheses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1994;107:381–393.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Geha AS, Laks H, Stensel HC et al. Late failure of porcine valve heterografts in children. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1979;78:351–364.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. David T, Armstrong S, Sun Z. The Hancock II bioprosthesis at ten years. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:S229–S234.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Barratt-Boyes BG, Jaffe WM, Hong Ko P, Whitlock RML. The Zero Pressure Fixed Medtronic Intact Porcine Valve: An 8.5 Year Review. J Heart Valve Dis 1993;2:604–611.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Lemieux MD, Jamieson W, Landymore RW, Dumesnil JG, Metras J, Munro AI, et al. Medtronic Intact Porcine bioprosthesis: clinical performance to seven years. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:S258–S263.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. O’Brien MF, Stafford EG, Gardner MA, Pohlner PG, Tesar P, et al. The Medtronic Intact Xenograft: an analysis of 342 patients over a seven year follow-up period. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:S253–S257.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Cosgrove DM, Lytle BW, Williams WG. Hemodynamic performance of the Carpentier-Edwards pericardial valve in the aortic position in vivo. Circulation 1985;72(Suppl):146.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Pellerin M, Mihaileanu S, Couetil JP, Relland J, Deloche A, et al. Carpentier-Edwards Pericardial bioprosthesis in aortic position: long term follow-up 1980 to 1994. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:S292–S296.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Pelletier LC, Carrier MC, Leclerc Y, Dyrda I. The Carpentier-Edwards Pericardial bioprosthesis: clinical experience with 600 patients. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:S297–S302.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Vitale N, Giannolo B, Nappi G, DeLuca L, Piazza L, Scardone M, Cotrufo M. Long term follow up of different models of mechanical and biological mitral prostheses. EJCTS 1995;9:181–189.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Committee on Management of Patients with Valvular Disease, Robert O. Bonow MC. ACC/ AHA Practice Guidelines: Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Valvular Disease. Circulation 1998;98:1949–1984.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Jin XY, Zhang Z, Gibson DG, Yacoub MH, Pepper JR. Effects of valve substitute on changes in left ventricular function and hypertrophy after aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 1996;62:683–690.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Del Rizzo DF, Goldman BS, Christakis GT, Powell AF, David TE. Hemodynamic Benefits of the Toronto Stentless valve. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996;112:1431–1446.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Walther T, Weigl C, Falk V, Deigler A, Shilling L, Autschbach R, Mohr FW. Impact of stentless in comparison to conventional aortic valves on postoperative left ventricular remodeling. European Heart Journal 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Orszulak TA, Schaff HV, Puga FJ, Danielson GK, Mullany CJ, et al. Event status of the Starr-Edwards Aortic Valve to 20 years: A benchmark for comparison. Ann Thorac Surg 1997;63:620–626.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Baudet E, Puel V, McBride J, Grimaud J, Roques R, et al. Long-term results of valve replacement with the St. Jude Medical Prosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995;109:858–870.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Richard A. Hopkins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Eric Lilly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James St. Louis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hopkins, R.A., Lilly, R.E., St. Louis, J. (2005). The Biological Valve Spectrum and a Rationale for Prosthetic Valve Choice. In: Cardiac Reconstructions with Allograft Tissues. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-26515-5_64

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-26515-5_64

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-94962-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-26515-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation