![]() |
|
||||||||||
![]() |
|
|||||||||
| The nation's #1 heart program by U.S. News & World Report for 13 years in a row! |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
Biologic Valves: Built to Last
Heart valves are marvels of natural engineering. Most people's last a lifetime. But when valves go bad, they may need to be repaired or replaced. Almost 90,0001 Americans a year need surgery for valve disease. Many of these people will get new, replacement valves made of mechanical or biologic (animal) materials. Which type of valve they get is an important decision and is often not decided until the time of surgery. Up until now, the biologic valve had one big disadvantage: it didn't last very long. Recently, however, Cleveland Clinic Heart Center researchers have turned that belief on its head. The biologic valve turns out to be a lot tougher than many people thought. Mechanical valves are known to be very sturdy. They are made of carbon covered with polyester mesh, and are practically indestructible. The big drawback is that patients who get this type of valve also need to take special blood thinners for the rest of their lives. Biological valves, by contrast, are made of specially processed and shaped animal tissue. They don't require the patient to take the blood thinners forever (unless they have other conditions which warrant it). On the other hand, surgeons were hesitant to implant them in patients who were much younger than 60. It was thought that they would wear out long before the patient did. That belief has now been challenged. Heart Center researchers Michael Banbury, M.D., Delos Cosgrove, M.D., James Thomas, M.D., and others2, discovered that patients who had received biologic heart valves, did very well. Even 17 years later. The Heart Center researchers studied 267 patients who had received a Carpentier-Edwards aortic pericardial valve replacement between 1981 and 1983. The researchers followed up on these patients every year thereafter. Many patients not only got echocardiograms, they filled out questionnaires. Outcome measurements included improvements or declines in the New York Heart Association classification of clinical symptoms and echo measurements to determine performance of the valve and size of the valve opening. How did they do? According to Dr. Banbury, after 17 years they were doing very well. The majority of patients, even with an increasing age enjoyed good functional status.
"The hemodynamic durability of this valve is excellent and resilient over time," says Dr. Banbury. "The findings from this study support its use in patients and may be considered for individuals younger than 65 years." References:
Click here for more information about valve surgery
|
![]() |
|
|||||||||||