Doppler Echocardiographic Assessment of Normally Functioning Starr-Edwards, Carbomedics and Carpentier-Edwards Valves in Aortic Position

Doppler echocardiography was performed in 168 normally functioning aortic prostheses to determine acceptable pressure gradients across the commonly used valves and to establish the relationship between valve size and gradients. There were 82 Carbomedics (C), 63 Starr-Edwards (SE), and 23 Carpentier-...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Angiology 1996-05, Vol.47 (5), p.481-489
Hauptverfasser: Chakraborty, Barendra, Quek, Susan, Ding Zee Pin, Chee Tek Siong, Tan Lay Kheng
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 489
container_issue 5
container_start_page 481
container_title Angiology
container_volume 47
creator Chakraborty, Barendra
Quek, Susan
Ding Zee Pin
Chee Tek Siong
Tan Lay Kheng
description Doppler echocardiography was performed in 168 normally functioning aortic prostheses to determine acceptable pressure gradients across the commonly used valves and to establish the relationship between valve size and gradients. There were 82 Carbomedics (C), 63 Starr-Edwards (SE), and 23 Carpentier-Edwards (CE) valves. Peak and mean gradients across the prostheses were measured by use of the simplified Bernoulli equation. CarboMedics valve had a lower peak and mean gradient than Starr-Edwards and Carpentier-Edwards valve (P < 0.05 when compared with Starr-Edwards). The authors observed a weak inverse correlation between valve size and peak and mean gradients in CarboMedics and Carpentier-Edwards valves but not in the Starr-Edwards valve. For the CarboMedics valve the peak pressure gradient (PPG) was 26.1 ±8.2 mm Hg and the mean pressure gradient (MPG) was 14.7 ± 5.1 mm Hg; in Starr-Edwards valve the PPG was 32.8 ±9.1 mm Hg and the MPG was 19.5 ±5.6 mm Hg; in the Carpentier-Edwards valve the PPG was 28.7 ± 10.1 mm Hg and the MPG was 16.1 ± 5.2 mm Hg when size was not specified. The CarboMedics valves were noted to have a better hemodynamic profile in comparison with Starr-Edwards and Carpentier-Edwards prostheses.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/000331979604700507
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78055129</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_000331979604700507</sage_id><sourcerecordid>78055129</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-7a0da3450486eea5398ea53d9e1e257348bdff0b12751b77352d36f4e2c617963</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1q3DAURkVomE7SvEChoFVXcSJZkmUvh-nkB4ak0CZbI8vXEwXbcnXthrxBHjsyM2RT6Ebics_3CR1CvnJ2wbnWl4wxIXihi4xJzZhi-ogseSFZwpWWn8hyBpKZ-ExOEJ_jqDjLFmSRZ1IWUi3J2w8_DC0EurFP3ppQO78LZnhylq4QAbGDfqS-oXc-dKZtX-nV1NvR-d71O_prNCEkm_olBvGcrk2ofAe1s0hNX8_zEOMOPhj6aNq_gNT1dOXDGF_56dHNdV_IcWNahLPDfUoerja_1zfJ9v76dr3aJlaIfEy0YbURUjGZZwBGiSKfz7oADqnSQuZV3TSs4qlWvNJaqLQWWSMhtRmPosQp-b7vHYL_MwGOZefQQtuaHvyEpc6ZUjwtIpjuQRs8YoCmHILrTHgtOStn_eW_-mPo26F9qqKIj8jBd9xf7vdodlA--yn08bP_a3wHaUSO1w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>78055129</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Doppler Echocardiographic Assessment of Normally Functioning Starr-Edwards, Carbomedics and Carpentier-Edwards Valves in Aortic Position</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Chakraborty, Barendra ; Quek, Susan ; Ding Zee Pin ; Chee Tek Siong ; Tan Lay Kheng</creator><creatorcontrib>Chakraborty, Barendra ; Quek, Susan ; Ding Zee Pin ; Chee Tek Siong ; Tan Lay Kheng</creatorcontrib><description>Doppler echocardiography was performed in 168 normally functioning aortic prostheses to determine acceptable pressure gradients across the commonly used valves and to establish the relationship between valve size and gradients. There were 82 Carbomedics (C), 63 Starr-Edwards (SE), and 23 Carpentier-Edwards (CE) valves. Peak and mean gradients across the prostheses were measured by use of the simplified Bernoulli equation. CarboMedics valve had a lower peak and mean gradient than Starr-Edwards and Carpentier-Edwards valve (P &lt; 0.05 when compared with Starr-Edwards). The authors observed a weak inverse correlation between valve size and peak and mean gradients in CarboMedics and Carpentier-Edwards valves but not in the Starr-Edwards valve. For the CarboMedics valve the peak pressure gradient (PPG) was 26.1 ±8.2 mm Hg and the mean pressure gradient (MPG) was 14.7 ± 5.1 mm Hg; in Starr-Edwards valve the PPG was 32.8 ±9.1 mm Hg and the MPG was 19.5 ±5.6 mm Hg; in the Carpentier-Edwards valve the PPG was 28.7 ± 10.1 mm Hg and the MPG was 16.1 ± 5.2 mm Hg when size was not specified. The CarboMedics valves were noted to have a better hemodynamic profile in comparison with Starr-Edwards and Carpentier-Edwards prostheses.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-3197</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1940-1574</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/000331979604700507</identifier><identifier>PMID: 8644945</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Aortic Valve ; Echocardiography, Doppler ; Female ; Heart Valve Prosthesis - classification ; Hemodynamics - physiology ; Humans ; Male ; Materials Testing ; Middle Aged</subject><ispartof>Angiology, 1996-05, Vol.47 (5), p.481-489</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-7a0da3450486eea5398ea53d9e1e257348bdff0b12751b77352d36f4e2c617963</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-7a0da3450486eea5398ea53d9e1e257348bdff0b12751b77352d36f4e2c617963</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/000331979604700507$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/000331979604700507$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,21823,27928,27929,43625,43626</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8644945$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chakraborty, Barendra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quek, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ding Zee Pin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chee Tek Siong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tan Lay Kheng</creatorcontrib><title>Doppler Echocardiographic Assessment of Normally Functioning Starr-Edwards, Carbomedics and Carpentier-Edwards Valves in Aortic Position</title><title>Angiology</title><addtitle>Angiology</addtitle><description>Doppler echocardiography was performed in 168 normally functioning aortic prostheses to determine acceptable pressure gradients across the commonly used valves and to establish the relationship between valve size and gradients. There were 82 Carbomedics (C), 63 Starr-Edwards (SE), and 23 Carpentier-Edwards (CE) valves. Peak and mean gradients across the prostheses were measured by use of the simplified Bernoulli equation. CarboMedics valve had a lower peak and mean gradient than Starr-Edwards and Carpentier-Edwards valve (P &lt; 0.05 when compared with Starr-Edwards). The authors observed a weak inverse correlation between valve size and peak and mean gradients in CarboMedics and Carpentier-Edwards valves but not in the Starr-Edwards valve. For the CarboMedics valve the peak pressure gradient (PPG) was 26.1 ±8.2 mm Hg and the mean pressure gradient (MPG) was 14.7 ± 5.1 mm Hg; in Starr-Edwards valve the PPG was 32.8 ±9.1 mm Hg and the MPG was 19.5 ±5.6 mm Hg; in the Carpentier-Edwards valve the PPG was 28.7 ± 10.1 mm Hg and the MPG was 16.1 ± 5.2 mm Hg when size was not specified. The CarboMedics valves were noted to have a better hemodynamic profile in comparison with Starr-Edwards and Carpentier-Edwards prostheses.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aortic Valve</subject><subject>Echocardiography, Doppler</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Heart Valve Prosthesis - classification</subject><subject>Hemodynamics - physiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Materials Testing</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><issn>0003-3197</issn><issn>1940-1574</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1996</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM1q3DAURkVomE7SvEChoFVXcSJZkmUvh-nkB4ak0CZbI8vXEwXbcnXthrxBHjsyM2RT6Ebics_3CR1CvnJ2wbnWl4wxIXihi4xJzZhi-ogseSFZwpWWn8hyBpKZ-ExOEJ_jqDjLFmSRZ1IWUi3J2w8_DC0EurFP3ppQO78LZnhylq4QAbGDfqS-oXc-dKZtX-nV1NvR-d71O_prNCEkm_olBvGcrk2ofAe1s0hNX8_zEOMOPhj6aNq_gNT1dOXDGF_56dHNdV_IcWNahLPDfUoerja_1zfJ9v76dr3aJlaIfEy0YbURUjGZZwBGiSKfz7oADqnSQuZV3TSs4qlWvNJaqLQWWSMhtRmPosQp-b7vHYL_MwGOZefQQtuaHvyEpc6ZUjwtIpjuQRs8YoCmHILrTHgtOStn_eW_-mPo26F9qqKIj8jBd9xf7vdodlA--yn08bP_a3wHaUSO1w</recordid><startdate>19960501</startdate><enddate>19960501</enddate><creator>Chakraborty, Barendra</creator><creator>Quek, Susan</creator><creator>Ding Zee Pin</creator><creator>Chee Tek Siong</creator><creator>Tan Lay Kheng</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19960501</creationdate><title>Doppler Echocardiographic Assessment of Normally Functioning Starr-Edwards, Carbomedics and Carpentier-Edwards Valves in Aortic Position</title><author>Chakraborty, Barendra ; Quek, Susan ; Ding Zee Pin ; Chee Tek Siong ; Tan Lay Kheng</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-7a0da3450486eea5398ea53d9e1e257348bdff0b12751b77352d36f4e2c617963</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1996</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aortic Valve</topic><topic>Echocardiography, Doppler</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Heart Valve Prosthesis - classification</topic><topic>Hemodynamics - physiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Materials Testing</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chakraborty, Barendra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quek, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ding Zee Pin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chee Tek Siong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tan Lay Kheng</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Angiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chakraborty, Barendra</au><au>Quek, Susan</au><au>Ding Zee Pin</au><au>Chee Tek Siong</au><au>Tan Lay Kheng</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Doppler Echocardiographic Assessment of Normally Functioning Starr-Edwards, Carbomedics and Carpentier-Edwards Valves in Aortic Position</atitle><jtitle>Angiology</jtitle><addtitle>Angiology</addtitle><date>1996-05-01</date><risdate>1996</risdate><volume>47</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>481</spage><epage>489</epage><pages>481-489</pages><issn>0003-3197</issn><eissn>1940-1574</eissn><abstract>Doppler echocardiography was performed in 168 normally functioning aortic prostheses to determine acceptable pressure gradients across the commonly used valves and to establish the relationship between valve size and gradients. There were 82 Carbomedics (C), 63 Starr-Edwards (SE), and 23 Carpentier-Edwards (CE) valves. Peak and mean gradients across the prostheses were measured by use of the simplified Bernoulli equation. CarboMedics valve had a lower peak and mean gradient than Starr-Edwards and Carpentier-Edwards valve (P &lt; 0.05 when compared with Starr-Edwards). The authors observed a weak inverse correlation between valve size and peak and mean gradients in CarboMedics and Carpentier-Edwards valves but not in the Starr-Edwards valve. For the CarboMedics valve the peak pressure gradient (PPG) was 26.1 ±8.2 mm Hg and the mean pressure gradient (MPG) was 14.7 ± 5.1 mm Hg; in Starr-Edwards valve the PPG was 32.8 ±9.1 mm Hg and the MPG was 19.5 ±5.6 mm Hg; in the Carpentier-Edwards valve the PPG was 28.7 ± 10.1 mm Hg and the MPG was 16.1 ± 5.2 mm Hg when size was not specified. The CarboMedics valves were noted to have a better hemodynamic profile in comparison with Starr-Edwards and Carpentier-Edwards prostheses.</abstract><cop>Thousand Oaks, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>8644945</pmid><doi>10.1177/000331979604700507</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-3197
ispartof Angiology, 1996-05, Vol.47 (5), p.481-489
issn 0003-3197
1940-1574
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78055129
source Access via SAGE; MEDLINE
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aortic Valve
Echocardiography, Doppler
Female
Heart Valve Prosthesis - classification
Hemodynamics - physiology
Humans
Male
Materials Testing
Middle Aged
title Doppler Echocardiographic Assessment of Normally Functioning Starr-Edwards, Carbomedics and Carpentier-Edwards Valves in Aortic Position
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-17T06%3A11%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Doppler%20Echocardiographic%20Assessment%20of%20Normally%20Functioning%20Starr-Edwards,%20Carbomedics%20and%20Carpentier-Edwards%20Valves%20in%20Aortic%20Position&rft.jtitle=Angiology&rft.au=Chakraborty,%20Barendra&rft.date=1996-05-01&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=481&rft.epage=489&rft.pages=481-489&rft.issn=0003-3197&rft.eissn=1940-1574&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/000331979604700507&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E78055129%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=78055129&rft_id=info:pmid/8644945&rft_sage_id=10.1177_000331979604700507&rfr_iscdi=true