|
|
||||||||
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;116:590-598
© 1998 Mosby, Inc.
SURGERY FOR ADULT CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE |
Rome, Italy
From the Cardiac Surgery Department, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Italy.
Received for publication Dec 22, 1997. Revisions requested Jan 29, 1998; revisions received May 26, 1998. Accepted for publication May 28, 1998. Address for reprints: Ruggero De Paulis, MD, Cattedra di Cardiochirurgia, Università di Roma, Tor Vergata, European Hospital, via Portuense 700, 00149 Rome, Italy.
Objective: Stentless biologic aortic valves are less obstructive than stented biologic or mechanical valves. Their superior hemodynamic performances are expected to reflect in better regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. We compared the regression of left ventricular hypertrophy in 3 groups of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis. Group I (10 patients) received stentless biologic aortic valves, group II (10 patients) received stented biologic aortic valves, and group III (10 patients) received bileaflet mechanical aortic valves.
Methods: Echocardiographic evaluations were performed before the operation and after 1 year, and the results were compared with those of a control group. Left ventricular diameters and function, left ventricular wall thickness, and left ventricular mass were assessed by echocardiography.
Results: Group I patients had a significantly lower maximum and mean transprosthetic gradient than the other valve groups (P = .001). One year after operation there was a significant reduction in left ventricular mass for all patient groups (P < .01), but mass did not reach normal values (P = .05). Although the rate of regression in the interventricular septum and posterior wall thickness differed slightly among groups, their values at follow-up were comparable and still higher than control values (P = .002). The ratio between interventricular septum and posterior wall and the ratio between wall thickness and chamber radius did not change significantly at follow-up.
Conclusions: Because the number of patients was relatively small, we could not use left ventricular mass regression after 1 year to distinguish among patients undergoing aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis by means of valve prostheses with different hemodynamic performances.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. Grunenfelder, I. Kilb, A. Plass, S. Cominelli, D. Zeller, and M. Genoni Impact of Coronary Disease After Aortic Valve Replacement Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann, June 1, 2009; 17(3): 248 - 252. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. S. Risteski, S. Martens, A. Rouhollahpour, G. Wimmer-Greinecker, A. Moritz, and M. Doss Prospective randomized evaluation of stentless vs. stented aortic biologic prosthetic valves in the elderly at five years Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, April 1, 2009; 8(4): 449 - 453. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Enriquez-Sarano, V. T. Nkomo, and H. Michelena Principles and Practice of Echocardiography in Cardiac Surgery Card. Surg. Adult, January 1, 2008; 3(2008): 315 - 348. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
N. D. Desai and G. T. Christakis Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement: Stented Pericardial and Porcine Valves Card. Surg. Adult, January 1, 2008; 3(2008): 857 - 894. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
D. Grandmougin and G. Fayad Implantation of a modified freestyle valve with a single inflow suture line: technical patterns and advantages. Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 2006; 82(3): 1128 - 1130. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. B. Chambers, H. M. Rimington, F. Hodson, R. Rajani, and C. I. Blauth The subcoronary Toronto stentless versus supra-annular Perimount stented replacement aortic valve: Early clinical and hemodynamic results of a randomized comparison in 160 patients J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., April 1, 2006; 131(4): 878 - 882. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Roscitano, U. Benedetto, A. Sciangula, E. Merico, F. Barberi, R. Bianchini, E. Tonelli, and R. Sinatra Indexed effective orifice area after mechanical aortic valve replacement does not affect left ventricular mass regression in elderly Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., February 1, 2006; 29(2): 139 - 143. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Doss, J. P. Wood, S. Martens, G. Wimmer-Greinecker, and A. Moritz Do Pulmonary Autografts Provide Better Outcomes Than Mechanical Valves? A Prospective Randomized Trial Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2005; 80(6): 2194 - 2198. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. F. Duebener, U. Stierle, A. Erasmi, M. F. Bechtel, D. Zurakowski, J. O. Bohm, C. A. Botha, W. Hemmer, J.-G. Rein, H.-H. Sievers, et al. Ross Procedure and Left Ventricular Mass Regression Circulation, August 30, 2005; 112(9_suppl): I-415 - I-422. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. B. Eichinger, F. Botzenhardt, A. Keithahn, R. Guenzinger, S. Bleiziffer, I. Wagner, R. Bauernschmitt, and R. Lange Exercise hemodynamics of bovine versus porcine bioprostheses: A prospective randomized comparison of the mosaic and perimount aortic valves J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., May 1, 2005; 129(5): 1056 - 1063. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Tasca, F. Brunelli, M. Cirillo, M. DallaTomba, Z. Mhagna, G. Troise, and E. Quaini Impact of Valve Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Left Ventricular Mass Regression Following Aortic Valve Replacement Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2005; 79(2): 505 - 510. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Gaudino, F. Alessandrini, F. Glieca, N. Luciani, C. Cellini, C. Pragliola, M. Morelli, C. Canosa, G. Nasso, and G. Possati Survival after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: does left ventricular mass regression have a clinical correlate? Eur. Heart J., January 1, 2005; 26(1): 51 - 57. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
U. C. Sharma, P. Barenbrug, S. Pokharel, W. R. M. Dassen, Y. M. Pinto, and J. G. Maessen Systematic review of the outcome of aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis Ann. Thorac. Surg., July 1, 2004; 78(1): 90 - 95. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Tasca, F. Brunelli, M. Cirillo, A. Amaducci, Z. Mhagna, G. Troise, and E. Quaini Mass regression in aortic stenosis after valve replacement with small size pericardial bioprosthesis Ann. Thorac. Surg., October 1, 2003; 76(4): 1107 - 1113. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. D. Desai and G. T. Christakis Stented Mechanical/Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement Card. Surg. Adult, January 1, 2003; 2(2003): 825 - 856. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
D. B. Doty and J. R. Doty Stentless Aortic Valve Replacement: Bioprostheses Card. Surg. Adult, January 1, 2003; 2(2003): 889 - 898. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
G. Cohen, G. T. Christakis, C. D. Joyner, C. D. Morgan, M. Tamariz, N. Hanayama, H. Mallidi, J.P. Szalai, M. Katic, V. Rao, et al. Are stentless valves hemodynamically superior to stented valves? A prospective randomized trial Ann. Thorac. Surg., March 1, 2002; 73(3): 767 - 778. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Westaby, M. Horton, X. Y. Jin, T. Katsumata, O. Ahmed, S. Saito, H.-H. Li, and G. L. Grunkemeier Survival advantage of stentless aortic bioprostheses Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 2000; 70(3): 785 - 791. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
O. Bech-Hanssen, K. Caidahl, B. Wall, P. Myken, S. Larsson, and I. Wallentin INFLUENCE OF AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT, PROSTHESIS TYPE, AND SIZEON FUNCTIONAL OUTCOME AND VENTRICULAR MASS IN PATIENTS WITH AORTIC STENOSIS J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., July 1, 1999; 118(1): 57 - 65. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Regression of LVH Unrelated to Valve Type Journal Watch Cardiology, November 13, 1998; 1998(1113): 4 - 4. [Full Text] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |