|
|
||||||||
|
Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg 2007;6:551-557. doi:10.1510/icvts.2007.159277 © 2007 European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery
Should the tricuspid valve be replaced with a mechanical or biological valve?
a Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK
*Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +44-780-1548122. A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether patients requiring tricuspid replacement should have a mechanical or a biological valve. Using the reported search, 561 papers were identified. Thirteen papers represented the best evidence on the subject. The author, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes, weaknesses, results and study comments were tabulated. We conclude that there are no major differences between the insertion of a mechanical or biological tricuspid valve. Aggregating the available data it is found that the reoperation rate is similar with bioprosthetic degeneration rate being equivalent to the mechanical thrombosis rate. Conversely up to 95% of patients with a bioprosthesis still receive anticoagulation. Survival in over 1000 prostheses pooled by meta-analysis was equivalent between biological and mechanical valves.
Key Words: Tricuspid valve; Artificial valve; Thoracic surgery; Tricuspid valve replacement
Related Articles
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |