Search

Background:  Aortic valve replacement (AVR) in small aortic roots remains a surgical dilemma with a higher risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM). The Perimount Magna Ease aortic valve (PMEAV) represents an attractive device in such cases. We examined the early hemodynamic performance, the mid-term outcomes of the PMEAV, and the impact of PPM on outcome and functional class., Methods:  We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected in-hospital data, and a prospective single-center follow-up of 849 patients who received a 19 to 23 mm PMEAV (2008-2014). Concomitant mitral or tricuspid replacement was the exclusion criterion. Early hemodynamic features were prospectively collected; mid-term follow-up was conducted according to current guidelines., Results:  Size of implanted prosthesis was 19 mm in 11.5% of patients, 21 mm in 36.9%, and 23 mm in 51.5%. Operative mortality was 4.5% (3.1% for isolated AVR). The rate of severe and moderate PPMs was significantly higher in the 19 mm group. Follow-up was 99.9% complete (3.7 ± 2 years). Actuarial freedom from structural valve deterioration (SVD) at 5 years was 99.1%. At stratified Kaplan-Meier's analysis, PPM and age <70 years were associated with SVD. PPM was not associated with worse functional status (New York Heart Association class) or mortality at follow-up., Conclusion:  This series shows satisfactory clinical outcomes of the PMEAV implanted in small aortic annuli at mid-term follow-up. Although PPM may occur in smaller sizes, it has limited clinical impact, and it is not associated with mid-term mortality or worse functional class. Few SVD events are evidenced; nonetheless, limited follow-up duration and its methodology need to be considered., Competing Interests: All authors declare no conflict of interest with respect to the material presented in this article., (Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Objectives: Considering the good immediate results reported for transcatheter aortic valve implantation in high-risk patients, the role of conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR) is being questioned, especially in elderly patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate our long-term results of conventional AVR in octogenarians., Methods: A total of 2005 patients aged ≥80 years underwent AVR for aortic stenosis in our institution between 1978 and 2011. Of these, 1009 (50%) patients had an associated extracardiac comorbidity and 650 (32%) patients had coronary lesions. Valve replacement was the sole procedure in 1515 (76%) patients, and 396 (19%) patients had concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting. Data were collected at the time of surgery in our database, and regularly updated by mailed questionnaires and telephone contact., Results: Early mortality of isolated AVR was 5.5% for the last 10 years of the series. Significant risk factors were chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic renal failure, advanced cardiac disease [left or right ventricular failure, New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class IV and atrial fibrillation] and coronary disease. Long-term follow-up was 99.5% complete (9 patients lost to follow-up), totalling 8849 patient-years. Nine hundred and one patients died at late follow-up with a median survival of 7.1 years, with 7 patients becoming centenarian. Apart from older age, main late causes of death were cardiovascular (20.5%), neurological deficit (10.2%) and cancer (10.2%). Actuarial survival was 83%, 62.5% and 25% at 2, 5 and 10 years, respectively. This survival compares favourably with that of a French-matched population. Above all, 90% of late survivors reported functional improvement. Univariable and multivariable analysis identified risk factors of late death as male gender, associated comorbidity, renal failure, advanced cardiac disease, atrial fibrillation and impaired ventricular function. Coronary lesions, associated cardiac surgery and small diameter prostheses (19 or 21 mm) did not impair long-term survival., Conclusions: AVR is effective for all age groups to treat aortic stenosis. Elderly people should not be denied surgery only because of their old age as conventional AVR provides an excellent quality of life and restores life expectancy. Percutaneous valve implantation is to be considered, in cases of non-operable or high-risk patients. However, to date, open-heart surgery remains the treatment of choice for aortic stenosis for the majority of patients.

Objective: To address the long-term durability of bioprostheses used for aortic valve replacement (AVR) in adult patients aged ≤60 years at the time of surgery., Methods: Through a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database, we identified 416 bioprosthetic AVRs performed between 1977 and 2013. A prospective follow-up of valve-related and non-valve-related events was performed., Results: Follow-up was 98.5% complete (2423.1 patient-years; average, 6 ± 5.5 years). At 15 years, overall survival was 62.1 ± 4.4%; freedom from valve-related death was 97.1 ± 1.6%. There were 68 SVD events (11.9 ± 28.8 years after surgery). Freedom from SVD at 15 years was 48.7 ± 5.5% for Kaplan-Meier analysis and 61.4 ± 4.3% for competing-risks analysis. After stratification into age subgroups (<40 years, ≥40 and <50 years, and ≥50 and ≤60 years), we observed no significant difference in freedom from SVD (P = .50). The average delay to SVD was not statistically different among subgroups (P = .30). There were 57 reoperations for SVD (11.8 ± 5.2 years after implantation). The 15 year freedom from reoperation for SVD was 55.4 ± 5.6% by Kaplan-Meier analysis and 67.1 ± 4.2% by competing-risks analysis. After stratification by age, freedom from reoperation for SVD was comparable (P = .13). Freedom from any valve-related complication or death was 42 ± 5% by Kaplan-Meier analysis and 54.4 ± 4.1% by competing-risks analysis., Conclusions: The lifetime risk of SVD is considerable in patients aged ≤60 years at the time of bioprosthesis implantation. Nonetheless, durability remains consistent during the first decade; additional data are required for the second decade. Patients' information is pivotal for valve choice (competing-risks method)., (Copyright © 2017 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To clarify the mid-term durability of the Trifecta bioprosthesis for aortic valve replacement (AVR)., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the prospectively collected data of 824 consecutive implants of the Trifecta valve at a single institution. A 100% complete follow-up was available (average duration, 2.2 ± 1.3 years; range, 0.03-6.9 years; 1747.6 patient-years). Echocardiography data at discharge were recorded prospectively., Results: Operative mortality was 3.8%; 2.7% in patients receiving isolated AVR. There were 5 valve-related early reoperations, including 1 for infective prosthetic endocarditis and 4 for nonstructural valve dysfunction. The global rate of severe patient-prosthesis mismatch was 1.26%. Overall 5-year survival was 74.9%, and freedom from valve-related death was 97.8%. The majority of deaths attributed to the valve were due to unknown causes. We observed 6 SVD events at 3.4 ± 1.6 years after surgery. At 5 years, the actuarial freedom from SVD was 98% ± 0.9% (n = 6), freedom from reintervention for SVD was 98% ± 0.9% (n = 5, including 2 transcatheter valve-in-valve), and freedom from open reoperation for SVD was 98.9% ± 0.6%. The 5-year freedom from prosthetic endocarditis was 97.7% ± 0.7% (n = 12, 6 requiring reoperation). There was 1 case of late NSVD (5-year freedom, 99.8% ± 0.2%). Freedom from hemorrhagic events was 98.6% ± 0.5% (86% occurring in patients on anticoagulants); there were no thromboembolic events at follow-up., Conclusions: The Trifecta bioprosthesis is a reliable device for AVR. We confirm excellent immediate hemodynamic properties and a very low rate of patient-prosthesis mismatch. The absolute number of SVD cases observed remains limited; nevertheless, their timing, pathological characteristics, and clinical presentation mandate continued follow-up., (Copyright © 2016 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The St Jude Medical Trifecta bioprosthesis incorporates a single pericardial sheet externally mounted on a titanium stent that provides excellent haemodynamic results. The purpose of this multicentre study was to report on the haemodynamic performance and the expected lower risk of prosthesis-patient mismatch in patient with small aortic annulus diameters., Methods: The 19- and 21-mm Trifecta valves were implanted in 88 and 266 eligible patients, respectively between 2011 and 2013 at three centres in France (Angers, Rennes and Amiens). The mean age of the population was 78 ± 7 and 76 ± 6 years for 19- and 21-mm valve sizes of which 96.6 and 68% were female, respectively. The aortic valve replacement was associated with another surgery in 18.2 and 21.8% in each group, respectively., Results: The mean follow-up was 20.3 ± 11.9 and 24 ± 11.4 months for 19- and 21-mm valves, respectively. Early all-cause mortality was 2.5% and late mortality occurred in 5.8% of patients. The mean pressure gradient and the effective orifice area at discharge and at 1 year were respectively 12.4 ± 4.6 and 14.7 ± 5.8 mmHg (P = 0.003), 1.5 ± 0.3 and 1.4 ± 0.9 cm(2) (P = 0.06) in the 19-mm valve group; 10.4 ± 3.8 and 11.7 ± 4.5 mmHg (P = 0.001), 1.8 ± 0.3 and 1.5 ± 0.4 cm(2) (P = 0.1) in the 21-mm valve group. At 1 year, only 38 (11%) and 28 (8.1%) patients presented a moderate or severe prosthesis-patient mismatch for the two groups. After univariate analysis, no risk factor of mismatch was found., Conclusions: The 19- and 21-mm St Jude Medical Trifecta provide excellent haemodynamic performance and the rate of moderate and severe prosthesis-patient mismatch is low., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: We address the differential long-term results of tricuspid valve replacement and late valve-related events among bioprostheses versus mechanical prostheses., Methods: In a single-institution investigation, we reviewed the patients' prospectively collected data and performed a clinical follow-up. Both the Kaplan-Meier (actuarial) and the competing risks (actual) methodologies were used., Results: Overall, 188 tricuspid valve replacements were performed during 1971 to 2012. In this complex population (reoperations, 48.1%; associated procedures in 71.3%), operative mortality was 27.6% (significantly declining in recent years). A bioprosthesis was used in 82.4%. Follow-up was 10.2 ± 9.1 years (as long as 37.3 years, or 1,270 patient-years; 91.2% complete). At 15 years, freedom from structural valve deterioration was 93.3% ± 6.4% (competing risks 94.7 ± 5.1%) in the mechanical group and 85.2% ± 5.4% (competing risks 92% ± 2.9%) in the bioprostheses group (p = 0.19). Freedom from any valve-related adverse events was lower among mechanical valves versus bioprostheses (although not statistically significant). Mechanical valves showed significantly lower freedom from thromboembolic events (actuarial 62.3% ± 14.3% versus 97.7% ± 1.6%; competing risks 74.1% ± 10% versus 98% ± 1.4%; p < 0.001) and earlier adverse events (4.9 ± 4.5 versus 11.1 ± 9.4 years) than bioprostheses. There were 11 reoperations for bioprosthetic structural valve deterioration (89.8% and 94.3% actuarial and actual freedom, respectively)., Conclusions: Bioprostheses for tricuspid valve replacement have a very good long-term durability. Mechanical valves display earlier and more severe morbidity at follow-up., (Copyright © 2016 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To examine the haemodynamic performance of the St Jude Trifecta valve for aortic valve replacement (AVR) at 3 years after implantation., Methods: In a single-centre, prospective, observational, independent study, we enrolled 122 patients who had AVR using a Trifecta bioprosthesis in the July 2010-June 2011 period. A clinical and echocardiographic in-house follow-up was scheduled., Results: In our series, 14.7% of patients received a 19-mm, 28.7% had a 21-mm, 35.2% had a 23-mm and 21.3% had a greater-size prosthesis. There were no cases of operative mortality or of valve-related complications both early and at follow-up (except one sudden unexplained death). Completeness of the 3-year echocardiographic follow-up was 80% among survivors. The average mean transvalvular gradient (mTVG) at 3 years was 14.2, 10.8, 8.6, 7.1 and 6.8 mmHg (sizes 19 to 27/29, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference between average mTVGs measured immediately after implantation versus at the 3-year follow-up in the overall population. The average peak transvalvular gradient (pTVG) at 3 years was 25, 20, 16.8, 13.9 and 14.4 mmHg (sizes 19 to 27/29, respectively). The average indexed effective orifice area (iEOA) at 3 years was 0.8, 0.9, 1, 1.3 and 1.3 cm(2)/m(2) (sizes 19-27, respectively). The rate of moderate patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) at 3 years was 15.7%; there were two instances of severe PPM (2.2%). All cases of PPM occurred in the 19, 21 and 23 mm size subgroups., Conclusions: The Trifecta valve retains its excellent haemodynamic properties at the 3-year follow-up. The rate of PPM is considerably low., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

The valve-in-valve (ViV) procedure is an option for patients with symptomatic structural degeneration of a bioprosthesis and excessive reoperative risk. The risk of coronary obstruction appears to be increased if ViV is performed for certain pericardial prostheses in which the leaflets are mounted outside the stent posts. Herein is described a successful ViV for a degenerated Trifecta aortic bioprosthesis, and the technical considerations for performing a ViV procedure within such types of prosthesis are considered. Emphasis is placed on the importance of preoperative investigations (computed tomography scan-based measurements of coronary ostial height and of sinus of Valsalva diameters), and on the precise deployment of the valve (transapical approach with transesophageal echocardiography control) to minimize the risk of major complications. The presence of a failing Trifecta bioprosthesis should not be considered an absolute contraindication to ViV on the basis of the risk of coronary obstruction.

Analysis of the causes, outcomes, and mortality of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis requiring the implantation of 2 valves during transcatheter aortic valve implantation was conducted from the French Aortic National CoreValve and Edwards 2 (FRANCE2) registry. Pre- and postprocedural data from 3,919 patients from January 2010 to December 2011 (CoreValve or Edwards) were collated and analyzed. Characteristics of patients requiring immediate second valve procedures were compared with those of the other patients. The 72 patients (1.8%) who underwent implantation of a second valve were studied. Indications were device malpositioning (72%) and embolization (28%). Clinical and echocardiographic characteristics of patients receiving 2 valves were comparable with those of the other patients. The 2-year survival rate was 51.7% for patients with 2 valves as opposed to 62.3% for those with 1 valve (p<0.001). The need for a second valve was an independent predictor of all-cause (hazard ratio 2.32, 95% confidence interval 1.50 to 3.60, p<0.001) and cardiovascular (hazard ratio 2.64, 95% confidence interval 1.35 to 5.15, p<0.001) mortality at 2 years. During follow-up, clinical and echocardiographic data remained similar between the 2 groups. In conclusion, in the FRANCE2 study, the main causes for second valve implantation during the same procedure were malpositioning and embolization. Although the procedure was feasible, it was accompanied by excess mortality. Valve hemodynamic status was preserved during the course of follow-up., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The study objective was to compare the 30-day outcomes of a standardized aortic valve repair technique (REPAIR group) associating root remodeling with an expansible aortic ring annuloplasty versus mechanical composite valve and graft (CVG group) replacement in treating aortic root aneurysms., Methods: A total of 261 consecutive patients with aortic root aneurysm were enrolled in this multicentric prospective cohort (131 in the CVG group, 130 in the REPAIR group) in 20 centers. The main end point is a composite criterion including mortality; reoperation; thromboembolic, hemorrhagic, or infectious events; and heart failure. Secondary end points were major adverse valve-related events. Crude and propensity score adjusted estimates are provided., Results: The mean age was 56.1 years, and the valve was bicuspid in 115 patients (44.7%). The median (interquartile range) preoperative aortic insufficiency grade was 2.0 (1.0-3.0) in the REPAIR group and 3.0 (2.0-3.0) in the CVG group (P = .0002). Thirty-day mortality was 3.8% (n = 5) in both groups (P = 1.00). Despite a learning curve and longer crossclamp times for valve repair (147.7 vs 99.8 minutes, P < .0001), the 2 groups did not differ significantly for the main criterion (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-2.40; P = .38) or 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-3053; P = .99), with a trend toward more frequent major adverse valve-related events in the CVG group (odds ratio, 2.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-7.40; P = .09). At discharge, 121 patients (96.8%) in the REPAIR group had grade 0 or 1 aortic insufficiency., Conclusions: A new standardized approach to valve repair, combining an expansible aortic annuloplasty ring with the remodeling technique, presented similar 30-day results to mechanical CVG with a trend toward reducing major adverse valve-related events. Analysis of late outcomes is in process for 3- and 10-year follow-ups., (Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: We addressed the long-term results of the Medtronic Mosaic porcine prosthesis in the aortic position., Methods: From 1994 to 2004, 1007 Mosaic valves were used for aortic valve replacement. The data were prospectively collected, retrospectively analyzed, and stratified according to patient age at surgery (group 1, <70 years; group 2, 70-75 years; group 3, 76-80 years; and group 4, >80 years), using both actual (cumulative risks) and actuarial methods., Results: Operative mortality was 5% (valve related in 14%). Globally, 8122.17 patient-years were available (average follow-up, 8.5 ± 3.9 years; 99.8% complete). Overall, survival at 15 years was lower among the elderly strata (P < .0001). Freedom from structural valve deterioration (SVD) was 95.1% (actual) and 86.3% (actuarial; 24 SVD events). Survival free from SVD was lower in group 1 (P = .003) but comparable among the other groups. Overall freedom at 15 years from the composite endpoint (any valve-related adverse events) was 82% (actual) and 71.3% (actuarial). No meaningful intergroup differences were found in survival free from the composite endpoint (P = .9) or freedom from valve-related mortality (P = .8). Younger patients at surgery did not show accelerated degeneration. No relationship could be established between prosthetic size and SVD., Conclusions: The implantation of a bioprosthesis in patients aged 70 years or older remains fully justified. The rate of SVD was higher in younger patients, mainly owing to their greater life expectancy. Patients younger than 70 can receive a bioprosthesis, provided that the correct information regarding the expected durability has been provided. This might be better accomplished through the actual methodology., (Copyright © 2014 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: We evaluate the clinical results of the Carpentier-Edwards supraannular (CE SAV) aortic bioprosthesis at long-term follow-up (over 25 years)., Methods: Between 1983 and 1994, 1,002 CE SAV prostheses were implanted. Data were prospectively collected, retrospectively analyzed, and stratified by age groups at the time of surgery (group 1, ≤60 years; group 2, 61 to 70 years; group 3, >70 years), using both the actuarial and the "actual" (cumulative risk) methods., Results: The operative mortality was 11.3% (valve-related in 2 cases). Follow-up included 8,164.09 patient-years (average 13.7±6.6 years, up to 26.9 years). Overall survival at 25 years was significantly higher in group 1 (p<0.001). Freedom from structural valve deterioration (SVD) at 15 years was 85.9% (actuarial) and 94.8% (actual). Freedom from reoperation for SVD was 91.8% (actuarial) and 97% (actual). There were no significant differences in valve-related endpoints among group 2 and group 3. Death was valve-related in 11.3%. Younger age at surgery was associated with higher incidence but not earlier presentation of SVD. Freedom from any valve-related complication at 15 years was 23.6%, 66%, and 68% in groups 1, 2, and 3 (actuarial), and 38.9%, 76.1%, and 81.2%, respectively (actual) (p=0.6 among groups 2 and 3)., Conclusions: The CE SAV bioprosthesis provides similar outcomes (SVD and reoperation) in patients aged 61 to 70 years and older individuals. Use of a bioprosthesis is justified in patients older than 60 years. Younger patients may be rightfully informed over the expected durability of the prosthesis., (Copyright © 2012 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a therapeutic alternative for high-surgical-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Two models of prosthesis are currently commercialized in France, which can be implanted either via a transarterial or a transapical approach. The aim of the study was to evaluate in a national French registry the early safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (AVR) using either the Edwards SAPIEN™ or CoreValve™ in high-surgical-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis., Methods and Results: The multicentre national registry was conducted in 16 centres between February 2009 and June 2009, under the authority of the French Societies of Cardiology and Thoracic and Cardio-Vascular Surgery. The primary endpoint was mortality at 1 month. Two hundred and forty-four high-surgical-risk patients (logistic EuroSCORE ≥20%, STS ≥10%, or contra-indication to AVR) were enrolled. Mean age was 82 ± 7 years and 43.9% were female. Edwards SAPIEN and CoreValve were implanted in 68 and 32% of patients, respectively. The approaches used were transarterial (transfemoral: 66%; subclavian: 5%) or transapical in 29%. Device success rate was 98.3% and 30-day mortality was 12.7%. Severe complications included stroke (3.6%), tamponade (2%), acute coronary occlusion (1.2%), and vascular complications (7.3%). Pacemaker was required in 11.8%. At 1 month, 88% of patients were in NYHA class II or less., Conclusion: This prospective registry reflects the real-life experience of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in high-risk elderly patients in France. The early results are satisfactory in terms of feasibility, short-term haemodynamic and functional improvement, and safety. Longer term follow-up will be further assessed.

Background and Aim of the Study: Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) has been used to document the incidence of non-obstructive thrombosis (NOT) after mechanical prosthetic mitral valve replacement (MVR). The postoperative occurrence and unpredictable evolution of NOT complicate its management. The study aim was to examine the safety and efficacy of prolonged, combined administration of heparin and vitamin K antagonists (VKA) recommended for this indication., Methods: All patients who underwent mechanical prosthetic MVR between July 1999 and December 2004 at the authors' institution were systematically studied with TEE immediately after surgery. Patients who presented with > or = 5 mm NOT were treated with combined heparin and VKA until TEE-confirmed resolution of the thrombus., Results: Among 256 patients who underwent 263 MVRs (seven reinterventions), 47 (17.9%) presenting with > or = 5 mm NOT received combined heparin and VKA for between 7 and 115 days (median 17 days). No thromboembolic or hemorrhagic events or deaths were observed during this period of observation. Four patients were treated with danaparoid and VKA because of thrombocytopenia induced by heparin before the diagnosis of NOT. Over a mean follow up of 39 months, one patient died from cancer and another from the sequelae of a stroke. In total, there were five NOT recurrences, three of which were complicated by embolic events without sequelae within eight months, and one by a recurrent stroke. In addition, three patients without demonstrable NOT recurrence suffered transient ischemic attacks., Conclusion: Among this small sample of patients, combined heparin and VKA was well tolerated and effective, and could prevent reoperation or thrombolysis. These observations may warrant further study in a larger patient population.

This prospective multicentre study assessed the midterm clinical and haemodynamic results of the Edwards Mira curved bileaflet prosthesis in aortic position. From June 1998 to October 2000, 117 patients, mean age 64 years (31-78 years) underwent aortic valve replacement with the Edwards Mira valve in three institutions. Clinical status, haemodynamic performance and valve related complications were assessed. Serial echocardiographic examinations were performed at discharge and at least two years follow-up. Operative mortality was 1.7% (n=2). Follow-up was 100% complete (594.1 patient-years). Actuarial survival at one, three and five years was 96.5+/-1.7%, 93.9+/-2.2% and 88.4+/-3.0%, respectively. Freedom from thrombosis was 99.1+/-0.9%, from embolic events: 96.2+/-1.9%, from bleeding events: 96.4+/-1.7%, and from non-structural dysfunction 97.2+/-1.6%. There was no structural dysfunction. The peak gradient at discharge was 22.13+/-8.1 mmHg down to 20.8+/-8 mmHg at 28 months. The mean gradient at discharge was 12.7+/-4.5 mmHg at discharge down to 10.8+/-4.2 mmHg at 28 months. The permeability index was 53.3+/-10% at 28 months. The Edwards Mira aortic valve showed excellent midterm haemodynamic performance, good midterm survival and low valve related complications rate. Long term follow-up remains to be assessed.

Improvements in the performance and longevity of biological valve prostheses have steadily increased their rates of implantation in recent years. Aortic bioprostheses, which are commonly used in the elderly or when the risks of anticoagulating are high, have generally been associated with low rates of long-term complications. Freedom from anticoagulation, therefore, represents the main theoretical advantage of biological, compared with mechanical, aortic prostheses. While a variety of anticoagulant and antiplatelet drug regimens have been described, a precise antithrombotic protocol for the early postoperative period after bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement has not been developed. There are also important differences between the international guidelines published. This review examines the clinical evidence concerning the use of vitamin K antagonist and antiplatelet therapy in the early management of the antithrombotic complications after bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement.

Thrombectomy could be an excellent approach on one condition (ie, that all parts of the thrombus are removed). We propose to use a tool (ie, the blower) to complete thrombectomy of the prosthetic mechanical valve. The blower is a vaporizer that mixes air and heparinized saline with regulator of flow and proportion used in beating heart surgery. For thrombectomy, we have modified the air-water mixing part and intensity until we obtained a jet that enabled us to remove the micro thrombus that covered the prosthetic valve and surrounding tissues. The blower completely cleaned the prosthetic valve. With this tool, thrombectomy seems easier, more complete, and more reliable with the advantages of short cross-clamping time.

Background and Aim of the Study: The Medtronic Intact porcine bioprosthesis is a second-generation porcine bioprosthesis. This study was designed to evaluate results with this valve implanted in the aortic position at 13 years, notably with regard to the risk of structural valve deterioration (SVD)., Methods: A total of 188 patients (mean age 72.0+/-8.2 years; range: 28-89 years), who underwent aortic valve replacement between June 1987 and December 1990, was reviewed., Results: Operative mortality was 9.0% (n = 17). Mean follow up per patient was 7.2+/-4.2 years (maximum 13.6 years); total follow up was 1,408.4 years. Linearized late mortality rate was 6.8%/patient-year (pt-yr) (n = 96), and the overall survival at 13 years 31.5+/-4.3%. SVD occurred in eight patients (linearized rate 0.57%/pt-yr), and freedom from SVD at 10 and 13 years was respectively 95.8+/-1.9% and 91.0+/-3.3% actuarial, and 97.3+/-1.2% and 95.5+/-1.6% actual. The mean time to onset of SVD was 7.8+/-2.8 years, and was independent of patient age at the time of implantation. Freedom from SVD at 10 and 13 years by age groups was: age < or =60 years, 76.6+/-14.8% and 60.9+/-18.0% actuarial, and 80.0+/-12.6% and 68.6+/-15.1% actual (linearized rate 3.3%/pt-yr); age 61-70 years, 96.3+/-2.6% and 92.4+/-4.5% actuarial, and 96.6+/-2.4% and 94.8+/-2.9% actual (linearized rate 0.37%/pt-yr); and age >70 years, 98.3 1.7% and 95.8+/-3.0% actuarial, and 99.2+/-0.8% and 98.3+/-1.2% actual (linearized rate 0.26%/pt-yr) (p <0.007)., Conclusion: When implanted in the aortic position, the Medtronic Intact porcine bioprosthesis provides a low rate of SVD at 13 years. The prosthesis can be used in the aortic position in subjects aged over 60 years with a low rate of deterioration, similar to that with other second-generation bioprostheses.