EJCTS Click here for details of sales representative
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Marc Ruel
Alexander Kulik
Fraser D. Rubens
Paul J. Hendry
Roy G. Masters
Thierry G. Mesana
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ruel, M.
Right arrow Articles by Mesana, T. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ruel, M.
Right arrow Articles by Mesana, T. G.
Related Collections
Right arrow Valve disease

Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2005;27:425-433
© 2005 Elsevier Science NL


Long-term outcomes of valve replacement with modern prostheses in young adults

Marc Ruela,b,*, Alexander Kulika, Buu K. Lama, Fraser D. Rubensa, Paul J. Hendrya, Roy G. Mastersa, Pierre Bédarda, Thierry G. Mesanaa

a Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, 40 Ruskin Street, Suite 3403, Ottawa, Ont., Canada K1Y 4W7
b Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ont., Canada

Received 9 September 2004; received in revised form 22 November 2004; accepted 1 December 2004.

* Corresponding author. Address: Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, 40 Ruskin Street, Suite 3403, Ottawa, Ont., Canada K1Y 4W7. Tel.: +1 613 761 4893; fax: +1 613 761 4713. (E-mail: mruel{at}ottawaheart.ca).

Objectives: To examine the multiple impacts of valve replacement on the lives of young adults. Methods: Patients (N=500) between age 18 and 50 who had aortic valve replacement (AVR) and/or mitral valve replacement (MVR) with contemporary prostheses were followed annually. Events, functional status, and quality of life were examined with regression models. Results: Median follow-up was 7.1±5.3 years (maximum 26.7 years). Five, 10, and 15-year survival was 92.7±1.7, 88.3±2.4 and 80.1±4.7% after AVR, and 93.1±2.3, 79.5±4.3 and 71.5±5.4% after MVR, respectively. Survival decreased with concomitant coronary disease (hazard ratio (HR): 4.5) and preoperative LV grade (HR: 2.0/grade increase) in AVR patients, and with atrial fibrillation (HR: 5.5), coronary disease (HR: 5.7), preoperative left atrial diameter (HR: 3.0/cm increase) and NYHA class (HR: 2.1/class increase) in MVR patients. Despite reoperation, late survival was equivalent between bioprostheses and mechanical valves in both implant positions. The ten-year cumulative incidence of embolic stroke was 6.3±2.4% for mechanical AVR patients, 6.4±2.9% for bioprosthetic AVR patients, 12.7±3.9% for mechanical MVR patients, and 3.1±3.1% for bioprosthetic MVR patients. Atrial fibrillation (HR: 2.8) and smoking (HR: 4.0) were risk factors for stroke in MVR patients. In AVR patients, SF-12 physical scores, freedom from recurrent heart failure, and freedom from disability were significantly higher in bioprosthetic than mechanical valve patients. Career or income limitations were more often subjectively linked to a mechanical prosthesis in both implant positions. Conclusions: Late outcomes of modern prosthetic valves in young adults remain suboptimal. Bioprostheses deserve consideration in the aortic position, as mechanical valves are associated with lower physical capacity, a higher prevalence of disability, and poorer disease perception. Early surgical referral and atrial fibrillation surgery may improve survival after MVR.

Key Words: Follow-up studies • Prognosis • Prosthesis • Valves




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Eur Heart JHome page
J. Kempfert, J. M. Blumenstein, M. A. Borger, A. Linke, S. Lehmann, P. Pritzwald-Stegmann, M. W.A. Chu, G. Schuler, V. Falk, F. W. Mohr, et al.
Minimally invasive off-pump valve-in-a-valve implantation: the atrial transcatheter approach for re-operative mitral valve replacement
Eur. Heart J., June 20, 2008; (2008) ehn285v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur Heart JHome page
L. M.A. Klieverik, J. A. Bekkers, J. W. Roos, M.J.C. Eijkemans, G. B. Raap, Ad. J.J.C. Bogers, and J. J.M. Takkenberg
Autograft or allograft aortic valve replacement in young adult patients with congenital aortic valve disease
Eur. Heart J., June 1, 2008; 29(11): 1446 - 1453.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Asian Cardiovasc. Thorac. Ann.Home page
R. P Akhtar, A. R Abid, H. Zafar, S. S Sheikh, M. A Cheema, and J. S Khan
Prosthetic Valve Replacement in Adolescents with Rheumatic Heart Disease
Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann, December 1, 2007; 15(6): 476 - 481.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg.Home page
Y. S. Tjang, Y. van Hees, R. Korfer, D. E. Grobbee, and G. J.M.G. van der Heijden
Predictors of mortality after aortic valve replacement
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., September 1, 2007; 32(3): 469 - 474.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
D. L. Ngaage, H. V. Schaff, C. J. Mullany, S. Barnes, J. A. Dearani, R. C. Daly, T. A. Orszulak, and T. M. Sundt III
Influence of Preoperative Atrial Fibrillation on Late Results of Mitral Repair: Is Concomitant Ablation Justified?
Ann. Thorac. Surg., August 1, 2007; 84(2): 434 - 443.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur Heart JHome page
S. Ray, J. Chambers, C. Gohlke-Baerwolf, and B. Bridgewater
Mitral valve repair for severe mitral regurgitation: the way forward?
Eur. Heart J., December 2, 2006; 27(24): 2925 - 2928.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg.Home page
A. Kulik, P. Bedard, B-K. Lam, F. D. Rubens, P. J. Hendry, R. G. Masters, T. G. Mesana, and M. Ruel
Mechanical versus bioprosthetic valve replacement in middle-aged patients.
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., September 1, 2006; 30(3): 485 - 491.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.Home page
F. Bakhtiary, M. Schiemann, O. Dzemali, T. Wittlinger, M. Doss, H. Ackermann, A. Moritz, and P. Kleine
Stentless bioprostheses improve postoperative coronary flow more than stented prostheses after valve replacement for aortic stenosis
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., April 1, 2006; 131(4): 883 - 888.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
F. B. Vanky, E. Hakanson, E. Tamas, and R. Svedjeholm
Risk Factors for Postoperative Heart Failure in Patients Operated on for Aortic Stenosis
Ann. Thorac. Surg., April 1, 2006; 81(4): 1297 - 1304.
[Abstract] [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
Copyright © 2005 European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier. All rights reserved.