HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Tirone E. David Christopher M. Feindel Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by David, T. E. Articles by Armstrong, S. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by David, T. E. Articles by Armstrong, S. Related Collections Related Article

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008;135:19-24
© 2008 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery

Surgery for Acquired Cardiovascular Disease

Aortic valve replacement with Toronto SPV bioprosthesis: Optimal patient survival but suboptimal valve durability

Peter Munk Cardiac Centre at Toronto General Hospital and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Read at the Thirty-third Annual Meeting of the Western Thoracic Surgical Association, Santa Ana Pueblo, NM, June 27-30, 2007.

Received for publication January 20, 2007; revisions received March 21, 2007; accepted for publication April 12, 2007.

^_* Address for reprints: T. E. David, MD, 200 Elizabeth St. 4N457, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 2C4. (Email: tirone.david{at}uhn.on.ca).

Objective: Our objective was to examine the clinical outcomes of aortic valve replacement with the Toronto SPV bioprosthesis at 12 years.

Methods: The Toronto SPV was used for aortic valve replacement in 357 patients from July 1991 to December 2004. There were 244 men and 113 women with a mean age of 65 ± 10 years. Aortic stenosis was present in 79% of patients, coronary artery disease in 38%, and left ventricular ejection fraction less than 0.40 in 12%. Patients had an annual assessment of valve function using echocardiography. The mean duration of follow-up was 7.7 ± 3.2 years.

Results: There were 2 operative and 79 late deaths, of which 13 were valve related and 25 heart related. Survival at 12 years was 64% ± 4% and similar to that of the general population matched for age and sex. Forty-nine patients had echocardiographic evidence of bioprosthetic dysfunction. The freedom from structural valve degeneration at 12 years was 69% ± 4% for all patients, 52% ± 8% for patients less than 65 years of age, and 85% ± 4% for patients 65 years of age or older (P = .002). Fifty patients had redo aortic valve replacement: 45 for structural valve degeneration and 5 for endocarditis. The freedom from redo aortic valve replacement at 12 years was 69% ± 4%. Cusp tear with consequent aortic insufficiency was the most common cause of structural valve degeneration. At the latest follow-up contact, 226 (63%) patients were alive with the Toronto SPV valve in place, and 69% were in functional class I, 24% in class II, and 7% in class III.

Conclusions: The Toronto SPV bioprosthesis has provided optimal patient survival and symptomatic improvement but suboptimal valve durability, particularly in patients less than 65 years of age. We now use of this valve mostly in older patients who have a small aortic annulus.

Related Article

Discussion
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2008 135: 24. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				F. Ius, C. Basso, M. Della Barbera, E. Mazzaro, G. Thiene, M. Valente, and U. Livi CryoLife O'Brien aortic stentless prosthesis reoperations: clinical results and morphologic findings Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, April 1, 2013; 43(4): 729 - 736. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Finch, I. Roussin, and J. Pepper Failing stentless aortic valves: redo aortic root replacement or valve in a valve? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, March 1, 2013; 43(3): 495 - 504. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. A. Folliguet, F. Laborde, K. Zannis, G. Ghorayeb, A. Haverich, and M. Shrestha Sutureless Perceval Aortic Valve Replacement: Results of Two European Centers Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2012; 93(5): 1483 - 1488. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Funder Current status on stentless aortic bioprosthesis: a clinical and experimental perspective Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, April 1, 2012; 41(4): 790 - 799. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. C. Ennker, A. Albert, F. Dalladaku, U. Rosendahl, J. Ennker, and I. Florath Midterm outcome after aortic root replacement with stentless porcine bioprostheses Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, August 1, 2011; 40(2): 429 - 434. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. P. Urbanski, N. Heinz, X. Zhan, H. Hijazi, M. Zacher, and A. Diegeler Modified bio-Bentall procedure: 10-year experience, Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, June 1, 2010; 37(6): 1317 - 1321. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. S. McClure, N. Narayanasamy, E. Wiegerinck, S. Lipsitz, A. Maloney, J. G. Byrne, S. F. Aranki, G. S. Couper, and L. H. Cohn Late Outcomes for Aortic Valve Replacement With the Carpentier-Edwards Pericardial Bioprosthesis: Up to 17-Year Follow-Up in 1,000 Patients Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2010; 89(5): 1410 - 1416. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Gulbins and H. Reichenspurner Which Patients Benefit From Stentless Aortic Valve Replacement? Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2009; 88(6): 2061 - 2068. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]