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 Brown, P. S. Articles by Clark, R. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Brown, P. S., Jr Articles by Clark, R. E.

The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol 55, 631-640, Copyright © 1993 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

ARTICLES

Relation between choice of prostheses and late outcome in double-valve replacement

PS Brown Jr, CS Roberts, CL McIntosh, JA Swain and RE Clark
Surgery Branch, National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.

The purpose of this study was to determine if the combination of a mechanical and bioprosthetic valve in the aortic and mitral positions influences late morbidity and mortality when compared with patients who had dual mechanical or dual bioprosthetic valves inserted. We reviewed the course of 89 hospital survivors of combined aortic and mitral valve replacement. The mean postoperative follow-up interval was 6.6 years, with a total follow-up of 583 years (98% complete). At 12 months after operation, mean functional class decreased from 3.1 to 1.7 (p < 0.05) and mean cardiac index increased from 2.1 to 2.5 L.min-1.m-2 (p < 0.05). Actuarial survival for the 89 patients (exclusive of < 30-day or in-hospital mortality, 14%) was 70%, 51%, and 33% at 5, 10, and 15 years. Freedom from reoperation was 93%, 78%, and 68%, and freedom from combined thromboembolism and anticoagulant-related hemorrhage was 82%, 60%, and 50%. These results show that there was no difference in overall survival in patients with dual mechanical valves, dual bioprosthetic valves, or a combination of both types at 15 years. There was, however, a lower reoperation rate in the group with dual mechanical valves as compared with the group with dual bioprosthetic valves (p < 0.05 at 10 years) or with a combination of valves (p < 0.05 at 15 years). The higher the number of mechanical valves the higher the combined risk of thromboembolism and anticoagulant-related hemorrhage.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

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]

				M. Hamamoto, K. Bando, J. Kobayashi, T. Satoh, Y. Sasako, K. Niwaya, O. Tagusari, T. Yagihara, and S. Kitamura Durability and outcome of aortic valve replacement with mitral valve repair versus double valve replacement Ann. Thorac. Surg., January 1, 2003; 75(1): 28 - 34. [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]

				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]