MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2006.05.031

Медицинская библиотека · The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2006

Fifteen-year results with the Hancock II valve: a multicenter experience.

Rizzoli Giulio, Mirone Salvatore, Ius Paolo, Polesel Elvio, Bottio Tomaso, Salvador Loris, Zussa Claudio, Gerosa Gino, Valfrè Carlo

СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this multi-institutional study was to review the 15-year outcome of patients who received isolated aortic or mitral valve replacement with the Hancock II bioprosthesis.

METHODS

From 1983 through 2002, 1274 patients underwent 1293 isolated valve replacements, 809 aortic valve replacements and 484 mitral valve replacements, at hospitals in the Venetian area (Padova, Treviso, and Venice). Mean age was 68 +/- 8 years in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement and 66 +/- 9 years in patients undergoing mitral valve replacement; 52% of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement and 63% of patients undergoing mitral valve replacement were in New York Heart Association class III or greater. Coronary artery disease was present in 32% of patients who had undergone aortic valve replacement and 18% of patients who had undergone mitral valve replacement. Follow-up included 8520 patient-years, with a median of 12 years, and was 97% complete.

RESULTS

Overall 15-year survival was 39.7% +/- 2.4%, similar in both the aortic and mitral positions. Multivariable analysis of late survival showed the incremental risk of male sex, higher New York Heart Association class, coronary artery disease, and mitral position. Freedom from embolism was higher in the aortic position (81% +/- 2.9% in aortic vs 72% +/- 4.7% in mitral valve replacements). Freedom from endocarditis was similar in the aortic and mitral position (95% +/- 1.2% vs 94% +/- 1.7%). Freedom from reoperation (82% +/- 3.7% vs 71% +/- 5.0%) and from valve-related morbidity-mortality (52% +/- 3.6% vs 36% +/- 4.4%) was higher in patients who had undergone AVR. Actual freedom from structural valve deterioration for patients 60 years and older who had undergone aortic valve replacement was 96.5% +/- 1.3% versus 88% +/- 3.2% for patients who had undergone mitral valve replacement and 70% +/- 7.5% versus 77.5% +/- 5.3%, respectively, in younger patients. Multivariable Weibull analysis showed structural valve deterioration related to younger age and preoperative valve incompetence and inversely related to coronary artery disease.

CONCLUSION

Optimal 15-year durability can be expected in male patients 60 years and older who have undergone aortic valve replacement and in male patients 65 years and older who have undergone mitral valve replacement, extending safely the age limits for the use of this valve.

Для цитирования: Rizzoli Giulio, Mirone Salvatore, Ius Paolo, Polesel Elvio, Bottio Tomaso, Salvador Loris, Zussa Claudio, Gerosa Gino, Valfrè Carlo. Fifteen-year results with the Hancock II valve: a multicenter experience.. The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery. 2006. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2006.05.031.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.