Advertisement!
Author Information Pack
Editorial Board
Submit article
Special Issue
Editor's selection process
Join as Reviewer/Editor
List of Reviewer
Indexing Information
Most popular articles
Purchase Single Articles
Archive
Free Online Access
Current Issue
Recommend this journal to your library
Advertiser
Accepted Articles
Search Articles
Email Alerts
FAQ
Contact Us
Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine and Surgery

Volume  3, Issue 2, Jul-Dec 2017, Pages 175-178
 

Original Article

Outcome of Bioprosthetic Aorticvalvular Replacement: A Single Centre Experience

Parth Solanki

Assistant Professor, Department of Cardio vascular and Thoracic Surgery, U.N. Mehta Institute of Cardiology and Research Center, (Affiliated to B.J. Medical College), Civil hospital Campus, Asarwa, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380016; India.

Choose an option to locate / access this Article:
90 days Access
Check if you have access through your login credentials.        PDF      |
|

Open Access: View PDF

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21088/jcms.2454.7123.3217.15

Abstract

Context: Use of bioprosthetic valves instead of mechanical valves is increasing even in young patients apparently because of its advantages. Aims: We aimed to report a single centre experience of bioprosthetic valvular replacement and the complications in Western Indians. Settings & Design: Prospective, observational. Methods & Material: We have enrolled 54 patients undergoingAVR using biological valve implantation from May 2012 to April 2016 in a Medical college at Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Demographic, clinical and operative details of the patients were collected. Statistical Analysis Used: The statistical calculations were performed using SPSS software v 20.0 (Chicago, IL, USA) Quantitative data was expressed as mean±SD whereas qualitative data was expressed as percentage. Kaplan Meier was performed to assess survival of the population. Results: Overall 22.22% mortality was observed in the study cohort. The probability of freedom from a survival event at 5 years was 77.8% for patients with mitral valve bio prosthetic replacement. Postoperative complications observed were tachyarrhythmia 4 (7.4%), reexploration 4 (7.4%), hemolysis 1 (1.85%) congenital cardiac failure 4 (7.4%), structural valve degeneration 8 (14.8%) and thromboembolism 4 (7.4%) in postoperative complication. Conclusions: In the present report, AVR with bioprosthetic valve for patients <70 years old was associated with a low reoperation rate, postoperative complications and higher survival.

 


Keywords : BioProsthetic Valve; Aortic Valve Replacement; Reoperation; Survival. 
Corresponding Author : Parth Solanki Assistant Professor Department of Cardio vascular and Thoracic Surgery, U. N. Mehta Institute of Cardiology and Research Center, (Affiliated to B. J. Medical College), New Civil Hospital Campus, Asarwa, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380016, India.