Porcine or Bovine Tissue Valves: Which are Better for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement?

Georgi Manchev, Valya Goranovska, Georgi Y. Stoitsev, Boyan Markov, V. Gegouskov
{"title":"Porcine or Bovine Tissue Valves: Which are Better for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement?","authors":"Georgi Manchev, Valya Goranovska, Georgi Y. Stoitsev, Boyan Markov, V. Gegouskov","doi":"10.2478/jbcr-2023-0023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary The choice between mechanical and bioprosthetic aortic valve implants is affected by relatively clear criteria. However, the choice between porcine or pericardial valve is more complex regarding bioprosthetic devices. We aimed to elucidate any hemodynamic and clinical difference between two widely used bioprosthetic valves: the Sorin Mitroflow bovine pericardial valve and the St. Jude Medical Epic Supra porcine valve. We retrospectively studied 71 consecutive patients separated into two groups based on the valve they received. Clinical outcomes included patient survival and hemodynamic performance of the implanted prostheses. Patients were assessed at one and five years postoperatively. Mean transprosthetic pressure gradients were used as a marker of hemodynamic performance. The Mitroflow valve exhibited lesser mean transvalvular gradients than the Epic valve for all labelled sizes at one and five years postoperatively. The 5-year survival was equal between groups. Both prostheses demonstrated a small but significant increase in mean pressure gradients in the fifth year. Most patients enjoyed significant clinical improvement as assessed by NYHA functional class. Both bioprostheses performed very well with excellent hemodynamic parameters. The pericardial valves are a safe and appropriate choice for surgical bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement.","PeriodicalId":15099,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Research","volume":"197 1","pages":"170 - 179"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jbcr-2023-0023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Summary The choice between mechanical and bioprosthetic aortic valve implants is affected by relatively clear criteria. However, the choice between porcine or pericardial valve is more complex regarding bioprosthetic devices. We aimed to elucidate any hemodynamic and clinical difference between two widely used bioprosthetic valves: the Sorin Mitroflow bovine pericardial valve and the St. Jude Medical Epic Supra porcine valve. We retrospectively studied 71 consecutive patients separated into two groups based on the valve they received. Clinical outcomes included patient survival and hemodynamic performance of the implanted prostheses. Patients were assessed at one and five years postoperatively. Mean transprosthetic pressure gradients were used as a marker of hemodynamic performance. The Mitroflow valve exhibited lesser mean transvalvular gradients than the Epic valve for all labelled sizes at one and five years postoperatively. The 5-year survival was equal between groups. Both prostheses demonstrated a small but significant increase in mean pressure gradients in the fifth year. Most patients enjoyed significant clinical improvement as assessed by NYHA functional class. Both bioprostheses performed very well with excellent hemodynamic parameters. The pericardial valves are a safe and appropriate choice for surgical bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
猪组织瓣膜还是牛组织瓣膜?手术主动脉瓣置换术哪种更好?
摘要 机械主动脉瓣植入物和生物人工主动脉瓣植入物的选择有相对明确的标准。然而,就生物修复瓣膜而言,选择猪瓣膜还是心包瓣膜则更为复杂。我们的目的是阐明两种广泛使用的生物人工瓣膜:Sorin Mitroflow 牛心包瓣膜和 St.我们对 71 名连续患者进行了回顾性研究,根据他们接受的瓣膜分为两组。临床结果包括患者存活率和植入假体的血液动力学性能。对患者进行了术后一年和五年的评估。平均经人工瓣膜压力梯度被用作血液动力学性能的标志。术后1年和5年,Mitroflow瓣膜在所有标记尺寸下的平均跨瓣压力梯度均小于Epic瓣膜。两组的五年存活率相同。两种人工瓣膜在术后第五年的平均压力梯度都有小幅但显著的增加。根据 NYHA 功能分级评估,大多数患者的临床症状都有明显改善。两种生物瓣膜的血流动力学参数都非常好。心包瓣膜是手术置换生物人工主动脉瓣的安全、合适的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Thromboprophylaxis during pregnancy for prevention of adverse complications in patients with inherited thrombophilia: a literature review Evaluation of Ki-67 index in breast cancer cases with intratumor heterogeneity Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the patients’ emotional state in general practice in Bulgaria A study of tumor budding and the factors, affecting interpretability of peritumoral budding, based on endoscopic colorectal biopsies from the left and right sided colorectal carcinoma Design of primers and optimization of PCR conditions for the detection of alternatively spliced isoforms of mouse ChAT mRNA
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1