Abstract
Bioprostheses have become the predominant diseased aortic valve substitute for aortic valve replacement. The experience of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons was published in 2009 by Brown and colleagues [1] documenting that the use of bioprostheses increased from 42% in 1996 to 78.4% in 2006. The mechanical prostheses use declined to 20.5%. The use of bioprostheses for aortic valve replacement has increased in Western Europe but not to the same extent. The current contemporary bioprostheses utilized world-wide were, in some cases, delayed by regulatory market approval in the United States. There is considerate opinion in the United States that current bioprostheses have the opportunity for advanced durability. Patients have had a renewed concern of anticoagulation management and complications. The knowledge of durability of the contemporary bioprostheses is of extreme importance in determining the risk of reoperation for SVD.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Brown JM, O’Brien SM, Wu C, Sikora JA, Griffith BP, Gammie JS (2009) Isolated aortic valve replacement in North America comprising 108,687 patients in 10 years: changes in risks, valve types, and outcomes in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 137(1):82–90
Jamieson WRE, Burr LH, Miyagishima RT, Germann E, Macnab JS, Stanford E et al (2005) Carpentier-Edwards supra-annular aortic porcine bioprosthesis: Clinical performance over 20 years. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 130(4):994–1000
Borger MA, Ivanov J, Armstrong S, Christie-Hrybinsky D, Feindel CM, David TE (2006) Twentyyear results of the Hancock II bioprosthesis. J Heart Valve Dis 15(1):49–55, discussion 55–56
Eichinger WB, Hettich IM, Ruzicka DJ, Holper K, Schricker C, Bleiziffer S, Lange R (2008) Twenty-year experience with the St. Jude medical Biocor bioprosthesis in the aortic position. Ann Thorac Surg 86(4):1204–1210
Myken PS, Bech-Hansen O (2009) A 20-year experience of 1712 patients with the Biocor porcine bioprosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 137(1):76–81
Aupart MR, Mirza A, Meurisse YA, Sirinelli AL, Neville PH, Marchand MA (2006) Perimount pericardial bioprosthesis for aortic calcified stenosis: 18-year experience with 1133 patients. J Heart Valve Dis 15(6):768, 775, discussion 775–776
Edwards Lifesciences LLC (2003) Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT aortic pericardial bioprosthesis: 20-year results. Clinical Communique, Edwards Lifesciences
Prasongsukarn K, Jamieson WRE, Lichtenstein SV (2005) Performance of bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses in age group 61–70 years. J Heart Valve Dis 14(4):501–508, 510–511, discussion 509
Jamieson WRE, Germann E, Aupart MR, Neville PH, Marchand MA, Fradet GJ (2006) 15-year comparison of supra-annular porcine and PERIMOUNT aortic bioprostheses. Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann 14(3):200–205
Jamieson WRE, Koerfer R, Yankah CA, Zittermann A, Hayden RI, Ling H, Hetzer R, Dolman WB (2009) Mitroflow aortic pericardial bioprosthesis — clinical performance. Eur J Cardio-Thorac Surg (in press)
Yankah CA, Pasic M, Musci M, Stein J, Detschades C, Siniawski H, Hetzer R (2008) Aortic valve replacement with the Mitroflow pericardial bioprosthesis: durability results up to 21 years. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 136(3):688–696
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jamieson, W.R.E. (2010). 20-Year durability of bioprostheses in the aortic position. In: Yankah, C.A., Weng, Y., Hetzer, R. (eds) Aortic Root Surgery. Steinkopff. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7985-1869-8_33
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7985-1869-8_33
Publisher Name: Steinkopff
Print ISBN: 978-3-7985-1868-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-7985-1869-8
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)