Comparative study between CardiaMed valves (freely floating valve leaflets) versus St. Jude Medical (fixed valve leaflets) in mitral valve replacement surgery

Mostafa Ahmed , Ezzeldin A. Mostafa , Ahmed Abd el Aziz Ibrahim , Ayman Mahmoud Ammar , Ramy Mohamed Reda Khorshid , Moataz E. Rezk
{"title":"Comparative study between CardiaMed valves (freely floating valve leaflets) versus St. Jude Medical (fixed valve leaflets) in mitral valve replacement surgery","authors":"Mostafa Ahmed ,&nbsp;Ezzeldin A. Mostafa ,&nbsp;Ahmed Abd el Aziz Ibrahim ,&nbsp;Ayman Mahmoud Ammar ,&nbsp;Ramy Mohamed Reda Khorshid ,&nbsp;Moataz E. Rezk","doi":"10.1016/j.jescts.2017.08.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>With the availability of a wide variety of valve prostheses, surgeons are still searching for the ideal valve, striving for improved hemodynamics, durability and thrombogenicity.</p><p>The purpose of this prospective, randomized, comparative study was to evaluate the early post-operative hemodynamic function and major clinical events in patients receiving CardiaMed™ prosthetic valves in comparison to St. Jude Medical™ (SJM) valves in the mitral valve position.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Between Sept 2013 and Sept 2015, 60 elective mitral valve replacement (MVR) patients in Ain Shams Hospital, Cairo, Egypt were divided into two groups of 30. Group I received the CardiaMed valve and Group II received the SJM valve. All patients were followed up at discharge from hospital, and at three and six months post-operatively.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There were no statistical differences between groups regarding the demographic data, preoperative clinical and functional NYHA class, cardiac assessment or mitral valve pathology. By the end of the follow up, there was no valve-related co-morbidity. Early post-operative complications were seen in 4 patients (13.3%) in Group I and in 5 patients in Group II (16.7%), namely; re-exploration for bleeding, rhythm disturbance, or wound infection. The PPG and MPG were slightly higher in Group I (10.9 ± 1.2 and 5.3 ± 0.9) than in Group II (10.2 ± 2.3 and 5.2 ± 1.3); p = 0.798 and 0.107 respectively. There was no significant statistical difference between the groups regarding the post-operative echo follow-up data.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>CardiaMed freely floating leaflet prostheses showed good hemodynamic characteristics. The prosthesis adequately corrects hemodynamics and is safe and no worse than the St. Jude Medical valve in the mitral valve position.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100843,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Egyptian Society of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery","volume":"25 3","pages":"Pages 242-248"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.jescts.2017.08.004","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Egyptian Society of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110578X17301505","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background

With the availability of a wide variety of valve prostheses, surgeons are still searching for the ideal valve, striving for improved hemodynamics, durability and thrombogenicity.

The purpose of this prospective, randomized, comparative study was to evaluate the early post-operative hemodynamic function and major clinical events in patients receiving CardiaMed™ prosthetic valves in comparison to St. Jude Medical™ (SJM) valves in the mitral valve position.

Methods

Between Sept 2013 and Sept 2015, 60 elective mitral valve replacement (MVR) patients in Ain Shams Hospital, Cairo, Egypt were divided into two groups of 30. Group I received the CardiaMed valve and Group II received the SJM valve. All patients were followed up at discharge from hospital, and at three and six months post-operatively.

Results

There were no statistical differences between groups regarding the demographic data, preoperative clinical and functional NYHA class, cardiac assessment or mitral valve pathology. By the end of the follow up, there was no valve-related co-morbidity. Early post-operative complications were seen in 4 patients (13.3%) in Group I and in 5 patients in Group II (16.7%), namely; re-exploration for bleeding, rhythm disturbance, or wound infection. The PPG and MPG were slightly higher in Group I (10.9 ± 1.2 and 5.3 ± 0.9) than in Group II (10.2 ± 2.3 and 5.2 ± 1.3); p = 0.798 and 0.107 respectively. There was no significant statistical difference between the groups regarding the post-operative echo follow-up data.

Conclusions

CardiaMed freely floating leaflet prostheses showed good hemodynamic characteristics. The prosthesis adequately corrects hemodynamics and is safe and no worse than the St. Jude Medical valve in the mitral valve position.

CardiaMed瓣(自由浮动瓣叶)与St. Jude Medical瓣(固定瓣叶)在二尖瓣置换术中的比较研究
随着各种瓣膜假体的可用性,外科医生仍在寻找理想的瓣膜,努力改善血流动力学,耐用性和血栓形成性。这项前瞻性、随机、比较研究的目的是评估在二尖瓣位置接受CardiaMed™人工瓣膜与St. Jude Medical™(SJM)瓣膜的患者的早期术后血流动力学功能和主要临床事件。方法选取2013年9月~ 2015年9月在埃及开罗Ain Shams医院行选择性二尖瓣置换术(MVR)的患者60例,分为两组,每组30例。第一组使用CardiaMed瓣膜,第二组使用SJM瓣膜。所有患者在出院时、术后3个月和6个月随访。结果两组患者在人口学资料、术前临床及功能NYHA分级、心脏评估及二尖瓣病理方面均无统计学差异。随访结束时,无瓣膜相关合并症。I组术后早期并发症4例(13.3%),II组术后早期并发症5例(16.7%),分别为;再次探查出血、节律紊乱或伤口感染。组PPG和MPG(10.9±1.2和5.3±0.9)略高于组(10.2±2.3和5.2±1.3);P = 0.798、0.107。两组术后超声随访资料比较,差异无统计学意义。结论游离小叶假体具有良好的血流动力学特性。该假体充分纠正了血流动力学,是安全的,并不比圣犹达医疗瓣膜在二尖瓣位置差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信