Loading…

The Bentall procedure: Is it the gold standard? A series of 597 consecutive cases

Objectives We compared aortic root reconstructions using conduits with biological valves and mechanical valves. Methods Of 597 patients (1995–2008), 307 (mean age 71 years [23–89 years]) had biological valves and 290 (mean age 51 years [21–82 years]) had mechanical valves. The subgroup of 242 patien...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery (Print) 2010-12, Vol.140 (6), p.S64-S70
Main Authors: Etz, Christian D., MD, PhD, Bischoff, Moritz S., MD, Bodian, Carol, DrPH, Roder, Fabian, MS, Brenner, Robert, BS, Griepp, Randall B., MD, Di Luozzo, Gabriele, MD
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objectives We compared aortic root reconstructions using conduits with biological valves and mechanical valves. Methods Of 597 patients (1995–2008), 307 (mean age 71 years [23–89 years]) had biological valves and 290 (mean age 51 years [21–82 years]) had mechanical valves. The subgroup of 242 patients aged 50 to 70 years included 133 with biological and 109 with mechanical valves. Results Overall hospital mortality was 3.9% with biological valves (n = 15; elective: 3.7% [n = 10]) versus 2.8% with mechanical valves (n = 8; elective: 1.4% [n = 3]). In patients 50 to 70 years, age greater than 65 years (relative risk: 3.3 [ P  = .0001]), clot (relative risk: 2.5 [ P  = .05]), coronary artery disease (relative risk:3.5 [ P  
ISSN:0022-5223
1097-685X
DOI:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2010.07.033