You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 114 No. 1, January 1979 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL ARTICLES
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati
What's this?

Prosthetic Aortic Valves

Indications for and Results of Reoperation

Richard J. Shemin, MD; Vincent A. Guadiani, MD; David M. Conkle, MD; Andrew G. Morrow, MD

Arch Surg. 1979;114(1):63-65.


Abstract

• During a 15-year period from January 1962 through December 1976, 42 patients who had undergone a previous aortic valve replacement underwent reoperation. The mean interval between operations was 4.4 years. The indications for reoperation were aortic regurgitation resulting from mechanical malfunction (12 patients), ball variance (15 patients), perivalvular leaks (five patients), prosthetic stenosis (eight patients), anemia (one patient), and recurrent emboli (one patient). The indications were characteristic of a specific valve series. The most common reoperation was aortic valve replacement (29/42), which had a 10.3% operative mortality. Poppet change (10/42) carried a 10% operative mortality and no operative deaths followed suture closure of perivalvular leaks. Eighty-eight percent of patients alive six months after reoperation were New York Heart Association functional class 1 or 2. At last follow-up, 95% of surviving patients were still functional class 1 or 2, with a mean cumulative survival of 4.7 years after reoperation. This experience demonstrates that those patients surviving long enough to undergo reoperation can expect a reasonable operative risk, long-term survival, and excellent clinical improvement.

(Arch Surg 114:63-65, 1979)



Author Affiliations

From the Surgery Branch, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md. Dr Shemin is presently with the Department of Surgery, Peter Bent Brighma Hospital, Boston.


Footnotes

Accepted for publication Sept 1, 1978.

Reprint requests to Bldg 10, Room 6N-252, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20014 (Dr Shemin).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Reoperation is not an independent predictor of mortality during aortic valve surgery
Davierwala et al.
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2006;131:329-335.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Aortic and Mitral Prosthetic Valve Reoperations: Early and Late Results
Rossiter et al.
Arch Surg 1979;114:1279-1283.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1979 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.