|
|
||||||||
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006;132:595-601
© 2006 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery
Surgery for Acquired Cardiovascular Disease |
a Cardiac Surgery Unit, Cà Foncello Hospital of Treviso, Treviso, Italy
b Cardiac Surgery Unit, University of Padova, Padova, Italy
c Cardiac Surgery Unit, Umberto I° Hospital of Venice, Venice, Italy.
Received for publication October 28, 2005; revisions received February 10, 2006; accepted for publication March 21, 2006. * Address for reprints: Giulio Rizzoli, MD, FETCS, Cardiochirurgia, Via Giustiniani 2 35128, Padova, Italy (Email: giulio.rizzoli{at}unipd.it).
OBJECTIVE: We performed a multi-institutional study to compare the long-term structural valve deterioration of isolated Hancock Standard versus Hancock II bioprostheses.
METHODS: From 1983 to 2002, 714 Hancock Standard and 1293 Hancock II bioprostheses were implanted at hospitals of the Venetian territory (Padova, Treviso, and Venice). Follow-up on January 1, 2003, included 14,749 patient-years with a median of 12 years and was 96% complete: 115 Hancock Standard and 53 Hancock II bioprostheses were at risk at 15 years. The 2 series were nonconcomitant, and many covariates differed (Table 1). Survival was analyzed with Cox analysis, and durability was analyzed with Weibull analysis. Balancing analysis with the logistic propensity score model was performed.
|
CONCLUSION: After balancing risk factors and calibrating age effects, Hancock II propensity-matched bioprostheses showed similar survival but definitely increased durability.
| 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 |