Surgical treatment of prosthetic valve endocarditis in patients with double prostheses: is single-valve replacement safe?

Objective: Bias against operating on patients with prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) who have multiple prostheses may preclude the use of life-saving valve replacement. We investigated the accuracy of the preoperative diagnosis of PVE in patients with both mitral and aortic prosthesis and the safety of single-valve replacement when only one valve seemed infected.

Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of active PVE who had mitral and aortic prosthesis in place were assessed.

Hemodynamic performance evaluation of small aortic ATS Medical valves by Doppler echocardiography.

Background And Aims Of The Study: The ATS Medical valve was first implanted in 1992. The purpose of this report was to establish the normal range of each hemodynamic parameter, measured by Doppler echocardiography, in small aortic ATS Medical valves.

Methods: Twenty-five patients with small aortic ATS Medical valves, operated on over six months, and with no cardiac or prosthetic dysfunction, in sinus rhythm, on adequate oral anticoagulant therapy, and no other valve prosthesis or significant valvulopathy, were reviewed on the basis of physical examination and transthoracic Doppler echocardiography.

Mechanical cardiac valve thrombosis. Is thrombectomy justified?

To determine the incidence and results of the treatment offered to acute thrombotic obstructions of mechanical valvular prostheses, we have reviewed a series of 3,637 consecutive hospital survivors who, between January 1970 and September 1990, underwent single mitral or aortic and double mitroaortic valve replacements (MVR, AVR, and DVR, respectively). The cumulative follow-up in these patients was 22,783 years (mean, 7.2 years; range, 0.

Surgical treatment of active prosthetic valve endocarditis. Results in 66 patients.

The results of combined medical and surgical management of 66 patients with active prosthetic valve endocarditis (APVE) are analyzed. Between 1970 and 1985, 3510 patients were operative survivors of mitral, aortic or double mitral-aortic valve replacement. Cumulative follow-up was 15,640 patient-years (mean 4.

Reoperations for left-sided low-profile mechanical prosthetic obstructions.

A series of 2,474 hospital survivors of primary mitral, aortic, and double mitral-aortic valve replacement were observed for a cumulative period of 11.945 years (mean, 4.2 years; range, 0.

Comparative clinical results with Omniscience (STM1), Medtronic-Hall, and Björk-Shiley convexo-concave (70 degrees) prostheses in mitral valve replacement.

The intermediate clinical results of 289 patients undergoing isolated mitral valve replacement with three different low-profile mechanical prostheses have been retrospectively analyzed and compared. Between June, 1980, and September, 1983, 70 patients received the Omniscience prosthesis, 159 patients the Medtronic-Hall valve, and 60 patients the convexo-concave 70 degree Björk-Shiley prosthesis. Hospital mortality was 15% for the Björk-Shiley group, 4.

Long-term comparative analysis of the Björk-Shiley and Hancock valves implanted in 1975.

The long-term results in all patients undergoing isolated mitral, aortic, or double mitral-aortic heart valve replacement operated upon in 1975 has been retrospectively analyzed. A total of 153 patients received the standard Björk-Shiley (flat pyrolytic disc) mechanical prostheses and 150 patients received the noncomposite Hancock porcine xenograft. Overall operative mortality was not significantly different between groups.

Early surgical results of the Medtronic-Hall valve.

A clinical trial with the Medtronic-Hall (M-H) valve was started in November 1981. From then until December 1982, 157 patients underwent heart valve replacement: Mitral valve replacement (MVR) 63 patients, isolated aortic valve replacement (MVR) 41 patients, and 53 underwent combined mitral-aortic valve replacement (MVR + AVR). Hospital mortality was 2.