Skip to main content
Log in

Results of prosthetic valve replacement for aortic stenosis

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: Aortic valve replacement with mechanical valves is associated with a small but constant risk of valve thrombosis and thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications. The surgical outcome of patients with Aortic Stenosis who had aortic valve replacement with mechanical valves is reported here.

Methods: Between January 1990 and October 1999, 275 patients underwent prosthetic valve replacement for isolated aortic stenosis. The age ranged between 13 years and 75 years and 230 were males. The cause of aortic stenosis was rheumatic in 185 patients (67.3%), followed by bicuspid aortic valve in 75 patients (27.3%) and degenerative in 15 patients (5.4%).

Results: The early mortality was 1.5%. The follow up was 96% complete and ranged from 1 to 104 months (mean 54±24.5months). Six patients (2.2%) developed prosthetic valve endocarditis. Paravalvular leak occurred in 3 (0.9%) patients. Valve thrombosis occurred in 10 patients (1.0% per patient year). The actuarial survival was 81±7% at 5 years and 64±13% at 8 years. Event free survival was 40±14% at 8 years.

Conclusion: With current operative techniques and myocardial preservation aortic stenosis patients are at low risk for surgery. However, long term survival is limited due to prosthesis related complications.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mautner GC, Mautner SL, Cannon RO III, et al. Clinical factors useful in predicting aortic valve structure in patients >40 years age with isolated valvular aortic stenosis. Am J Cardiol 1993; 72: 194–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Dare AJ, Veinot JP, Edwards WD, et al. New observations on the etiology of aortic valve disease: a surgical pathologic study of 236 cases from 1990. Hum Pathol 1993; 24: 1330–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Turri M, Thiene G, Bortolotti U, et al. Surgical pathology of aortic valve disease: a study based on 602 specimens. Eur J Cardio Thorac Surg 1990, 4: 556–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. David TE, Gott VL, Harker LA, et al. Mechanical valves. Ann Thorac Surg 1996; 62: 1567–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Akins CW. Results with mechanical cardiac valvular prostheses. Ann Thorac Surg 1995; 60: 1836–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Arom KV, Nicoloff DM, Kersten TE, et al. Ten years experience with the St. Jude Medical valve prosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 1989; 47: 831–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Arom KV. St. Jude medical prosthesis: Another 10-year followup report. Ann Thorac Surg 1993; 56: 403–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Edmunds LH (Jr.), Clarke RE, Cohn LH, et al. Guidelines for reporting morbidity and mortality after cardiac valvular operations. Ann Thor Surg 1996; 62: 932–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Grunkemeier GL, Thomas DR, Starr A. Statistical considerations in the analysis and reporting of time — related events. Application to analysis of prosthelic valve-related thromboembolism and failure. The American Journal of Cardiology. 1977; 257–58.

  10. Gonzalez-Juanatey JR, Garcia-Acuna JM, Vega Fernandez M, Amaro Cendon A, Castelo Fuentes V, Garcia-Bengoechea JB, et al. Influence of the size of aortic valve prosthesis on hemodynamics and change in left ventricular mass: implications for the surgical management of aortic stenosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996; 112: 273–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wiseth R, Levang OW, Sande E, Tanger G, Skjaerpe T, Halte L. Hemodynamic evaluation by Doppler echocardiograophy of small (<21 mm) prostheses and bio prostheses in the aortic valve position. Am J Cardiol 1992;70:240–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bove EL, Marvasti MA, Potts JL, Reger MJ, Zamora JL, Eich RH, et al. Rest an exercise hemodynamics following aortic valve replacement. A comparison between 19 and 21 mm Ionescu-Shiley pericardial and Carpentier — Edwards porcine valves. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1985;90: 750–55.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A Sampath Kumar M. Ch..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Devagourou, V., Choudhary, S., Bhan, A. et al. Results of prosthetic valve replacement for aortic stenosis. Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 18, 80–83 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12055-002-0038-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12055-002-0038-0

Key words

Navigation