PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

S A Slattery

Publications and source records attributed to S A Slattery.

3 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1991

Survival and valve failure after aortic valve replacement.

A prospective evaluation of 412 consecutive patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement between January 1982 and December 1985 was performed in an attempt to identify the determinants of survival and valve failure. A variety of valves were inserted to permit a prospective evaluation of alternative valves including: Björk-Shiley mechanical (n = 37), Ionescu-Shiley pericardial (n = 261), Hancock pericardial (n = 78), and Carpentier-Edwards porcine (n = 36). Thirteen patients died in the hospital (3.2%) and 47 patients died in the follow-up period producing an actuarial survival of 81% +/- 3% at 48 months. Survival was independently predicted by advancing age, preoperative New York Heart Association functional class, and the presence of endocarditis (p less than 0.05 by Cox regression analysis). The majority of patients were symptomatically improved (New York Heart Association class I or II: 21% preoperative, 88% postoperative). Freedom from structural valve dysfunction, prosthetic valve endocarditis, and reoperation for valve-related complications were 95% +/- 2%, 95% +/- 2%, and 92% +/- 2% at 48 months, respectively. These valve-related complications occurred more frequently in younger patients and in those with a Hancock pericardial valve (freedom from structural valve dysfunction, 89% +/- 5%; prosthetic valve endocarditis, 84% +/- 9%; reoperation, 78% +/- 10%; p less than 0.05 by Cox regression). Freedom from thromboembolism was 88% +/- 2% at 48 months; it was significantly lower in patients with a preoperative thromboembolic event and was not influenced by the type of prosthesis inserted. Freedom from anticoagulant-related hemorrhage was 85% +/- 8% at 48 months and was not influenced by any preoperative factors.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Aortic Valve↗
PubMed1987

Aortic valve replacement with a small prosthesis.

A small aortic prosthesis can be inserted in selected patients with excellent symptomatic improvement. A prospective evaluation was performed on 321 consecutive patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement between January 1982 and December 1984. Smaller prostheses (19 or 21 mm, predominantly pericardial valves, 132 patients) were inserted in older patients (p = .0001), women (p = .0001), smaller patients (body surface area: p = .0001), and patients with aortic stenosis (p = .0001). Twelve patients died in-hospital (3.7%) and 33 died during the follow-up period, producing an actuarial survival of 80% +/- 4% at 48 months. Survival was independently predicted by advancing age (p = .009), the preoperative NYHA functional class (p = .04) but not valve size (p = .28). Eighty-nine percent of patients were NYHA class I or II postoperatively compared with 22% preoperatively. Symptomatic recovery was similar for those with smaller size valves. Postoperative Doppler echocardiography in 57 patients revealed significant differences in aortic valve areas and gradients between the valve sizes. The 19 mm pericardial valves had the smallest areas (1.0 +/- 0.3 cm2) and the highest gradients (34 +/- 20 mm Hg). The aortic valve gradient was significantly related to cardiac output and valve size (p = .0001 by analysis of covariance). Linear regression analyses were used to estimate the aortic valve gradient during exercise (a 50% increase in cardiac output). The estimated exercise gradient was disturbingly high for the 19 mm valves (55 +/- 16 mm Hg), but the estimated exercise gradients for the 21, 23, and 25 mm valves were similar, all below 30 mm Hg. Aortic valve replacement with a small prosthesis resulted in excellent symptomatic improvement and acceptable resting valve gradients. However, a 19 mm prosthesis may produce prohibitive gradients during exercise, which may limit symptomatic recovery and should be avoided in active patients.

Actuarial Analysis↗