@article{JTD22076,
author = {Heemoon Lee and Kiick Sung and Wook Sung Kim and Dong Seop Jeong and Joong Hyun Ahn and Keumhee Chough Carriere and Pyo Won Park},
title = {Late clinical outcomes after mechanical aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: old versus new prostheses},
journal = {Journal of Thoracic Disease},
volume = {10},
number = {6},
year = {2018},
keywords = {},
abstract = {Background: The study aimed to evaluate the late clinical outcomes of new-generation mechanical valves for severe aortic stenosis (AS) compared with old mechanical valves.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed data from 254 patients with severe AS, who underwent primary mechanical aortic valve replacement from 1995 to 2013. Patients were classified into two groups: old-valve group (n=65: 33 ATS standard, 32 Medtronic-Hall) and new-valve group (n=189: 113 St. Jude Regent, 46 On-X, 30 Sorin Overline). Median patient age was 58 years (Q1–Q3: 52–61). With propensity score matching based on demographic information, 56 patients in the old-valve group were matched with 177 patients in the new-valve group. The median follow-up duration was 91 months (Q1–Q3: 48–138).
Results: Cardiac-related mortality and hemorrhagic events were significantly lower in the new-valve group (P=0.047 and P=0.032, respectively). The median international normalized ratio (INR) at follow-up was significantly higher in the old-valve group [2.23, Q1–Q3: 2.14–2.35 (old-valve group); 2.08, Q1–Q3: 1.92–2.23 (new-valve group), P},
issn = {2077-6624}, url = {https://jtd.amegroups.org/article/view/22076}
}