Carpentier-edwards standard porcine bioprosthesis: Clinical performance to seventeen years
References (19)
- et al.
Carpentier-Edwards standard porcine bioprosthese—primary tissue failure (structural valve deterioration) by age groups
Ann Thorac Surg
(1988) - et al.
Guidelines for reporting morbidity and mortality after cardiac valvular operations
Ann Thorac Surg
(1988) - et al.
Durability of porcine valves at fifteen years in a representative North American patient population
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
(1992) - et al.
Ten-year experience with the porcine bioprosthetic valve: interrelationship of valve survival and patient survival in 1,050 valve replacements
Ann Thorac Surg
(1990) - et al.
Clinical and hemodynamic assessment of Hancock II bioprosthesis
Ann Thorac Surg
(1992) - et al.
Carpentier-Edwards standard porcine bioprosthesis—a first generation tissue valve with excellent long-term clinical performance
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
(1990) - et al.
Age as a determinant for selection of porcine bioprostheses for cardiac valve replacement: experience with Carpentier-Edwards standard bioprosthesis
Can J Cardiol
(1991) - et al.
The Carpentier-Edwards standard porcine bioprostheses—clinical performance to fifteen years
J Cardiac Surg
(1991) - et al.
The Carpentier-Edwards supra-annular porcine bioprosthesis: clinical performance to 8 years of a new generation porcine bioprosthesis
J Cardiac Surg
(1991)
Cited by (130)
Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Aortic Valve Replacement as an Alternative to Surgical Re-Replacement
2020, Journal of the American College of CardiologyCitation Excerpt :This worldwide trend is mainly driven by the possible avoidance of long-life anticoagulant in case of bioprosthesis (when not needed for other reasons) (17). However, despite improvements in devices, the risk of structural valve degeneration of the current bioprostheses remains 1 of the main limitations in the long-term (1–3). Because redo SAVR procedure carries significant risks, VIV TAVR has emerged as a less-invasive option in case of failed surgical bioprosthesis.
Reintervention After Aortic Valve Replacement: Comparison of 3 Aortic Bioprostheses
2020, Annals of Thoracic SurgeryTranscatheter aortic valve replacement
2020, Emerging Technologies for Heart Diseases: Volume 1: Treatments for Heart Failure and Valvular DisordersIn Search of the Ideal Valve: Optimizing Genetic Modifications to Prevent Bioprosthetic Degeneration
2019, Annals of Thoracic SurgeryCitation Excerpt :Nevertheless, degeneration is progressive. In older adults, histologic evidence of calcification can be seen within 3 years, and by 10 years, 20% to 30% of bioprostheses become dysfunctional [5, 19]. In some situations, fewer than 10% of patients survive with the original prosthesis at 20 years [20].
Hemodynamic Performances and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Valve-in-Valve Versus Native Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation
2019, American Journal of Cardiology
Presented at the Thirty-first Annual Meeting of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, Palm Springs, CA, Jan 30–Feb 1, 1995.