Bioprosthetic replacement after bioprosthesis failure: a hazardous choice?

Background. Following bioprosthetic failure, replacement is usually done with mechanical valves to avoid repeated reoperations. Methods. From 1986 to 1996 we operated on 130 patients with bioprosthetic failure, implanting a new bioprosthesis; this group included patients with contraindication to ant...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Annals of thoracic surgery 1998-12, Vol.66 (6), p.S68-S72
Hauptverfasser: Spampinato, Nicola, Gagliardi, Cesare, Pantaleo, Donato, Fimiani, Ludovico, Ascione, Raimondo, De Robertis, Fabio, Musumeci, Antonino, Stassano, Paolo
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background. Following bioprosthetic failure, replacement is usually done with mechanical valves to avoid repeated reoperations. Methods. From 1986 to 1996 we operated on 130 patients with bioprosthetic failure, implanting a new bioprosthesis; this group included patients with contraindication to anticoagulation, tricuspid replacement, and specific patient requests. Mean age was 63 ± 8 years. Results. The perioperative mortality was 13.8%. At 10 year follow-up the actuarial estimate of survival was 77.4% ± 6.6%. Freedom from structural valve deterioration was estimated at 81.8% ± 6.3%. Freedom from a third operation was estimated at 85.5% ± 5.2%. No patient was permanently anticoagulated. Freedom from thromboembolism was estimated at 91.5% ± 4%, and there were no hemorrhages. Freedom from cardiac-related deaths was estimated at 85.7% ± 5%. Conclusions. This group of patients received the first valve between 1976 and 1986; the range of the cumulative follow-up reaches 20 years, and the extended survival compares favorably with survival of mechanical valves.
ISSN:0003-4975
1552-6259
DOI:10.1016/S0003-4975(98)01159-X