ATS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Barry B. Sheppard
Jeffrey C. Milliken
Ronald J. Nelson
David M. Follette
John M. Robertson
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sheppard, B. B.
Right arrow Articles by Robertson, J. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sheppard, B. B.
Right arrow Articles by Robertson, J. M.

Ann Thorac Surg 1991;52:59-65
© 1991 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons


Articles

Ultrasonic decalcification of the aortic annulus during aortic valve replacement

Barry B. Sheppard, MDa,b, Jeffrey C. Milliken, MDa,b, Ronald J. Nelson, MDa,b, David M. Follette, MDa,b, John M. Robertson, MD*,a,b

a Departments of Surgery, Harbor/UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, USA
b Departments of Surgery, Saint John's Hospital and Health Center, Santa Monica, California USA

Accepted for publication February 15, 1991.

* Address reprint requests to Dr Robertson, Harbor/UCLA Medical Center, 1000 W Carson St, Torrance, CA 90509.

Aortic valve replacement for calcific aortic stenosis requires meticulous debridement of the aortic annulus to effect optimal valve seating. Since 1987, we have used ultrasonic energy to debride the aortic annulus during aortic valve replacement in 56 patients. In our experience, ultrasonic debridement of the annulus is superior to traditional methods of debridement, affords improved seating of the valve, and may allow placement of a larger valve. Our follow-up ranges from 2 to 32 months (mean follow-up, 13 ± 9 months) with 0% incidence of paravalvular leak or valve failure. We advocate the use of ultrasonic debridement as an adjunctive tool in aortic valve replacement.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Asian Cardiovasc. Thorac. Ann.Home page
P. Ghosh
Ultrasonic Devices in Cardiac Surgery
Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann, December 1, 1999; 7(4): 333 - 338.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
F. J. Baumgartner, B. O. Omari, L. Stuart, J. C. Milliken, R. J. Nelson, and J. M. Robertson
Reversible snaring for proper prosthetic seating during valve replacement
Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 1998; 66(3): 957 - 958.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [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
Copyright © 1991 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons.