| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005;129:1056-1063
© 2005 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery
Surgery for Acquired Cardiovascular Disease |
German Heart Center Munich, Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Munich, Germany.
Received for publication May 21, 2004; revisions received July 30, 2004; accepted for publication August 18, 2004. * Address for reprints: Walter B. Eichinger, MD, Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, German Heart Center Munich, Lazarettstr 36, 80636 Munich, Germany. (E-mail: eichinger{at}dhm.mhn.de).
OBJECTIVE: This prospective randomized study compares a porcine with a bovine bioprosthesis in the aortic position with regard to hemodynamic performance during exercise.
METHODS: Between August of 2000 and December of 2002, 136 patients underwent aortic valve replacement with the porcine Medtronic Mosaic (n = 66) or the bovine Carpentier-Edwards Perimount (n = 70) bioprosthesis. Transthoracic echocardiography was performed to assess hemodynamic and dimensional data preoperatively and 10 months postoperatively; the latter follow-up included stress echocardiography with treadmill exercise.
RESULTS: At rest and during exercise (25 and 50 W), there was a significant difference in mean pressure gradient between the bovine and the porcine valves with labeled sizes 21 and 23, with superiority of the Perimount prosthesis. There was no difference in effective orifice area and incidence of patient-prosthesis mismatch among all sizes. The left ventricular mass index decreased significantly within 10 months postoperatively in the size 23 bovine group and the size 25 porcine group.
CONCLUSIONS: Our data show a significant superiority of pressure gradients for the bovine bioprosthesis, especially with small valve sizes, when compared with the porcine device, which is more distinctive during exercise.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. M. Suri, K. J. Zehr, T. M. Sundt III, J. A. Dearani, R. C. Daly, J. K. Oh, and H. V. Schaff Left ventricular mass regression after porcine versus bovine aortic valve replacement: a randomized comparison. Ann. Thorac. Surg., October 1, 2009; 88(4): 1232 - 1237. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. J. Ruzicka, I. Hettich, A. Hutter, S. Bleiziffer, C. C. Badiu, R. Bauernschmitt, R. Lange, and W. B. Eichinger The Complete Supraannular Concept: In Vivo Hemodynamics of Bovine and Porcine Aortic Bioprostheses Circulation, September 15, 2009; 120(11_suppl_1): S139 - S145. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Narayan, B. C. Reeves, S. I.A. Rizvi, K. Shokrollahi, H. Ismail, G. D. Angelini, A. Nightingale, and M. Caputo Hemodynamic Evaluation and Midterm Outcome of Aortic Valve Replacement With Size 19 Perimount Prosthetic Valve Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2008; 86(6): 1799 - 1803. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. B. Chambers, R. Rajani, D. Parkin, H. M. Rimington, C. I. Blauth, G. E. Venn, C. P. Young, and J. C. Roxburgh Bovine pericardial versus porcine stented replacement aortic valves: Early results of a randomized comparison of the Perimount and the Mosaic valves. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., November 1, 2008; 136(5): 1142 - 1148. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P.-Y. Litzler, A. Cribier, A. Zajarias, D. Comte, H. Eltchaninoff, C. Tron, C. Haas-Hubscher, and J.-P. Bessou Surgical aortic valve replacement after percutaneous aortic valve implantation: What have we learned? J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., September 1, 2008; 136(3): 697 - 701. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Bottio and G. Gerosa Conflicting Echocardiographic Evaluations of Supra-Annular Tissue Valves: A Mystery Not Yet Resolved Ann. Thorac. Surg., August 1, 2007; 84(2): 713 - 714. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. J. Dalmau, J. Maria Gonzalez-Santos, J. Lopez-Rodriguez, M. Bueno, A. Arribas, and F. Nieto One year hemodynamic performance of the Perimount Magna pericardial xenograft and the Medtronic Mosaic bioprosthesis in the aortic position: a prospective randomized study Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, June 1, 2007; 6(3): 345 - 349. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Gerosa, V. Tarzia, G. Rizzoli, and T. Bottio Reply to the Editor J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., March 1, 2007; 133(3): 847 - 849. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. B. Eichinger, I. M. Hettich, and R. Lange Small aortic annulus: The hydrodynamic performances of 5 commercially available tissue valves J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., December 1, 2006; 132(6): 1499 - 1500. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Gerosa, V. Tarzia, G. Rizzoli, and T. Bottio Reply to the Editor J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., December 1, 2006; 132(6): 1500 - 1501. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J. Dalmau, J. MariaGonzalez-Santos, J. Lopez-Rodriguez, M. Bueno, and A. Arribas The Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna aortic xenograft: a new design with an improved hemodynamic performance Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, June 1, 2006; 5(3): 263 - 267. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Gerosa, V. Tarzia, G. Rizzoli, and T. Bottio Small aortic annulus: The hydrodynamic performances of 5 commercially available tissue valves J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., May 1, 2006; 131(5): 1058 - 1064. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H.-H. Sievers Prosthetic aortic valve replacement J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., May 1, 2005; 129(5): 961 - 965. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| 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 |
