Heart, lung & circulation · 2014
The freestyle aortic bioprosthesis: a systematic review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sherrah Andrew G, Edelman J James B, Thomas Shane R, Brady Peter W, Wilson Michael K, Jeremy Richmond W, Bannon Paul G, Vallely Michael P
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Medtronic Freestyle bioprosthesis (FSB) provides an alternative to other prostheses for both aortic valve and aortic root surgery. This paper is a systematic review of the post-operative outcomes in patients with aortic valve and/or aortic root disease following FSB implantation.
METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for primary analysis, prospective randomised studies comparing the FSB with an alternative aortic prosthesis were included. Additionally, case series that included data for at least 100 individual operated patients were used for secondary analysis.
RESULTS: Among three identified randomised studies, 199 FSB cases were compared with homografts, and stented and an alternative stentless bioprosthesis. The FSB showed comparable hospital mortality (4.5% vs. 5.3%) and eight-year actuarial survival (80±5.0% versus 77±6.0%) with the homograft (respectively) and comparable reduction in left ventricular mass index relative to other prosthesis types. Over 6000 individual patients were included in the selected 15 case series. Weighted mean operative mortality, neurological event rate and five-year actuarial survival was 5.2%, 5.5% and 77.8%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The FSB performed comparably against alternative prostheses regarding in-hospital mortality, long-term survival and reduction in left ventricular mass index. Included case series demonstrated robust post-operative outcomes in both the short and long term.
METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for primary analysis, prospective randomised studies comparing the FSB with an alternative aortic prosthesis were included. Additionally, case series that included data for at least 100 individual operated patients were used for secondary analysis.
RESULTS: Among three identified randomised studies, 199 FSB cases were compared with homografts, and stented and an alternative stentless bioprosthesis. The FSB showed comparable hospital mortality (4.5% vs. 5.3%) and eight-year actuarial survival (80±5.0% versus 77±6.0%) with the homograft (respectively) and comparable reduction in left ventricular mass index relative to other prosthesis types. Over 6000 individual patients were included in the selected 15 case series. Weighted mean operative mortality, neurological event rate and five-year actuarial survival was 5.2%, 5.5% and 77.8%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The FSB performed comparably against alternative prostheses regarding in-hospital mortality, long-term survival and reduction in left ventricular mass index. Included case series demonstrated robust post-operative outcomes in both the short and long term.