Hancock II Bioprosthesis for Aortic Valve Replacement: The Gold Standard of Bioprosthetic Valves Durability?

被引:164
|
作者
David, Tirone E.
Armstrong, Susan
Maganti, Manjula
机构
[1] Toronto Gen Hosp, Peter Munk Cardiac Ctr, Div Cardiovasc Surg, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词
PERICARDIAL BIOPROSTHESIS; EXPERIENCE; PERFORMANCE; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1016/j.athoracsur.2010.05.034
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background. This study examined the long-term durability of the Hancock II bioprosthesis (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) in the aortic position. Methods. From 1982 to 2004, 1134 patients underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) with Hancock II bioprosthesis and were prospectively monitored. Mean patient age was 67 +/- 11 years; 202 patients were younger than 60, 402 were 60 to 70, and 526 were older than 70. Median follow-up was 12.2 years and 99.2% complete. Valve function was assessed in 94% of patients. Freedom from adverse events was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Results. Survival at 20 and 25 years was 19.2% +/- 2% and 6.7% +/- 2.8%, respectively, with only 34 and 3 patients at risk. Survival at 20 years was 54.9% +/- 6.4% in patients younger than 60 years, 22.7% +/- 3.3% in those 60 to 70, and 2.4% +/- 1.9% in those older than 70 (p = 0.01). Structural valve deterioration developed in 67 patients aged younger than 60, in 18 patients aged 60 to 70, and in 2 patients older than 70. The freedom from structural valve deterioration at 20 years was 63.4% +/- 4.2% in the entire cohort, 29.2% +/- 5.7% in patients younger than 60 years, 85.2% +/- 3.7% in patients aged 60 to 70, and 99.8% +/- 0.2% in patients older than 70 (truncated at 18 years). Repeat AVR was performed in 104 patients (74 for structural valve failure, 16 for endocarditis, and 14 for other reasons). At 20 years, the overall freedom from AVR was 65.1% +/- 4% for any reason, 29.8% +/- 5.4% in patients younger than 60 years, 86.8% +/- 3.3% in patients 60 to 70, and 98.3% +/- 0.6% in patients older than 70. Conclusions: Hancock II bioprosthesis is a very durable valve in patients 60 years and older and is probably the gold standard of bioprosthetic valve durability in this patient population. (Ann Thorac Surg 2010; 90: 775-81) (C) 2010 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons
引用
收藏
页码:775 / 781
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Encouraging durability results for sutureless aortic valve: The new gold standard for aortic valve replacement?
    Glauber, Mattia
    Miceli, Antonio
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2015, 150 (01) : 88 - 90
  • [2] Mid-term durability of the Trifecta bioprosthesis for aortic valve replacement
    Anselmi, Amedeo
    Ruggieri, Vito Giovanni
    Lelong, Bernard
    Flecher, Erwan
    Corbineau, Herve
    Langanay, Thierry
    Verhoye, Jean-Philippe
    Leguerrier, Alain
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2017, 153 (01) : 21 - +
  • [3] Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Failed Transcatheter Bioprosthetic Valves
    Tarantini, Giuseppe
    Sathananthan, Janarthanan
    Fabris, Tommaso
    Landes, Uri
    Bapat, Vinayak N.
    Khan, Jaffar M.
    Fovino, Luca Nai
    Zaid, Syed
    Van Mieghem, Nicolas M.
    Latib, Azeem
    Waksman, Ron
    De Backer, Ole
    Rogers, Toby
    Sondergaard, Lars
    Tang, Gilbert H. L.
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2022, 15 (18) : 1777 - 1793
  • [4] Twenty-year durability of the aortic Hancock II bioprosthesis in young patients: is it durable enough?
    Une, Dai
    Ruel, Marc
    David, Tirone E.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIO-THORACIC SURGERY, 2014, 46 (05) : 825 - 830
  • [5] Reoperative Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Replacement for Degenerated Bioprosthetic Aortic Valves
    Ejiofor, Julius I.
    Yammine, Maroun
    Harloff, Morgan T.
    McGurk, Siobhan
    Muehlschlegel, Jochen D.
    Shekar, Prem S.
    Cohn, Lawrence H.
    Shah, Pinak
    Kaneko, Tsuyoshi
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2016, 102 (05) : 1452 - 1458
  • [6] Should Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Become the Standard of Care for the Treatment of Failed Surgical Bioprosthetic Valves?
    Rodes-Cabau, Josep
    Alperi, Alberto
    Pibarot, Philippe
    CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2021, 14 (05) : 513 - 515
  • [7] Mitral valve replacement in children: balancing durability and risk with mechanical and bioprosthetic valves
    Van Puyvelde, Joeri
    Meyns, Bart
    Rega, Filip
    Gewillig, Marc
    Eyskens, Benedicte
    Heying, Ruth
    Cools, Bjorn
    Salaets, Thomas
    Hellings, Peter-William
    Meuris, Bart
    INTERDISCIPLINARY CARDIOVASCULAR AND THORACIC SURGERY, 2024, 38 (03):
  • [8] Rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement versus standard bioprosthesis implantation
    Ferrari, Enrico
    Roduit, Christelle
    Salamin, Pauline
    Caporali, Elena
    Demertzis, Stefanos
    Tozzi, Piergiorgio
    Berdajs, Denis
    von Segesser, Ludwig
    JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, 2017, 32 (06) : 322 - 327
  • [9] Bioprosthetic Valve Durability After Stentless Aortic Valve Replacement: The Effect of Implantation Technique
    Mohammadi, Siamak
    Kalavrouziotis, Dimitri
    Voisine, Pierre
    Dumont, Eric
    Doyle, Daniel
    Perron, Jean
    Dagenais, Francois
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2014, 97 (06) : 2011 - 2018
  • [10] Pulmonary Valve Replacement in Tetralogy of Fallot Procedural Volume and Durability of Bioprosthetic Pulmonary Valves
    Groening, Mathis
    Smerup, Morten Holdgaard
    Munk, Kim
    Andersen, Helle
    Nielsen, Dorte Guldbrand
    Nissen, Henrik
    Mortensen, Ulrik Markus
    Jensen, Annette Schophuus
    Baekke, Pernille Steen
    Bjerre, Jesper
    Engholm, Morten
    Vejlstrup, Niels
    Juul, Klaus
    Sondergaard, Eva Vad
    Thyregod, Hans Gustav Horsted
    Andersen, Henrik Orbaek
    Helvind, Morten
    De Backer, Ole
    Jons, Christian
    Schmidt, Michael Rahbek
    Jorgensen, Troels Hojsgaard
    Sondergaard, Lars
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2024, 17 (02) : 217 - 227