220 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16208612)
1. Different tilting disc valves show similar rotation-dependent impairment in hemodynamic performance under a tilted implantation position.
Hartrumpf M; Kuehnel RU; Puchner R; Wendt MO; Pohl M; Albes JM
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2005 Oct; 53(5):274-80. PubMed ID: 16208612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The hemodynamic performance of standard bileaflet valves is impaired by a tilted implantation position.
Hartrumpf M; Albes JM; Krempl T; Rudolph V; Wahlers T
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 2003 Mar; 23(3):283-91. PubMed ID: 12614795
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. In-vitro hemodynamics of stented bioprosthetic heart valves in the tilted implantation position.
Babin-Ebell J; Sievers HH; Misfeld M; Runge M; Vogt PR; Scharfschwerdt M
J Heart Valve Dis; 2008 Sep; 17(5):566-70. PubMed ID: 18980091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of hemodynamic performance of Medtronic Hall 21 mm versus St. Jude Medical 23 mm prostheses in pigs.
Kleine P; Abdel-Rahman U; Klesius AA; Scherer M; Simon A; Moritz A
J Heart Valve Dis; 2002 Nov; 11(6):857-63. PubMed ID: 12479289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A novel pulse duplicator system: evaluation of different valve prostheses.
Haaf P; Steiner M; Attmann T; Pfister G; Cremer J; Lutter G
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2009 Feb; 57(1):10-7. PubMed ID: 19169990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Tilting disc versus bileaflet aortic valve substitutes: intraoperative and postoperative hemodynamic performance in humans.
Kleine P; Hasenkam MJ; Nygaard H; Perthel M; Wesemeyer D; Laas J
J Heart Valve Dis; 2000 Mar; 9(2):308-11; discussion 311-2. PubMed ID: 10772054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Small aortic annulus: the hydrodynamic performances of 5 commercially available tissue valves.
Gerosa G; Tarzia V; Rizzoli G; Bottio T
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2006 May; 131(5):1058-64. PubMed ID: 16678590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. In vitro pulsatile flow hemodynamics of five mechanical aortic heart valve prostheses.
Walker PG; Yoganathan AP
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 1992; 6 Suppl 1():S113-23. PubMed ID: 1389270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The hemodynamic effects of mechanical prosthetic valve type and orientation on fluid mechanical energy loss and pressure drop in in vitro models of ventricular hypertrophy.
Travis BR; Heinrich RS; Ensley AE; Gibson DE; Hashim S; Yoganathan AP
J Heart Valve Dis; 1998 May; 7(3):345-54. PubMed ID: 9651851
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Comparative study of mechanical heart valves for implantation in mitral position].
Heiliger R; Lambertz H; Geks J; Mittermayer C
Herz; 1987 Dec; 12(6):405-12. PubMed ID: 3428845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Hemodynamic performance of newly developed composite stentless porcine aortic valve: in vitro testing and in vivo experiment with sheep].
Song GM; Zhou JY; Hu SS; Cui JW; Song YH; Tang Y; Zhang Y; Jiang H; Yuan WM; Song XY
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2008 Jul; 88(29):2059-63. PubMed ID: 19080436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Hemodynamic performance of the new St. Jude Medical Epic Supra porcine bioprosthesis in comparison to the Medtronic Mosaic on the basis of patient annulus diameter.
Ruzicka DJ; Eichinger WB; Hettich IM; Bleiziffer S; Bauernschmitt R; Lange R
J Heart Valve Dis; 2008 Jul; 17(4):426-33; discussion 434. PubMed ID: 18751473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Migration forces of transcatheter aortic valves in patients with noncalcific aortic insufficiency.
Dwyer HA; Matthews PB; Azadani A; Ge L; Guy TS; Tseng EE
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2009 Nov; 138(5):1227-33. PubMed ID: 19748632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Suboptimal geometrical implantation of biological aortic valves provokes functional deficits.
Kuehnel RU; Wendt MO; Jainski U; Hartrumpf M; Pohl M; Albes JM
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg; 2010 Jun; 10(6):971-5; discussion 975. PubMed ID: 20233809
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. In vitro comparison of different mechanical prostheses suitable for replacement of the systemic atrioventricular valve in children.
Bottio T; Dal Lin C; Lika A; Rizzoli G; Tarzia V; Buratto E; Gerosa G
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2012 Mar; 143(3):558-68. PubMed ID: 21890150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Hemodynamic characterization of calcified stenotic human aortic valves before and after treatment with a novel aortic valve repair system.
Ohashi KL; Culkar J; Riebman JB; Estes M; Constantz BR; Yoganathan AP
J Heart Valve Dis; 2004 Jul; 13(4):582-92; discussion 592. PubMed ID: 15311864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. High-intensity transient signals (HITS) as a parameter for optimum orientation of mechanical aortic valves.
Kleine P; Perthel M; Hasenkam JM; Nygaard H; Hansen SB; Laas J
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2000 Dec; 48(6):360-3. PubMed ID: 11145405
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Medtronic Hall versus St. Jude Medical mechanical aortic valve: downstream turbulences with respect to rotation in pigs.
Kleine P; Perthel M; Nygaard H; Hansen SB; Paulsen PK; Riis C; Laas J
J Heart Valve Dis; 1998 Sep; 7(5):548-55. PubMed ID: 9793855
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. In-vitro comparison of aortic valve hemodynamics between aortic root remodeling and aortic valve reimplantation.
Graeter TP; Fries R; Aicher D; Reul H; Schmitz C; Schäfers HJ
J Heart Valve Dis; 2006 May; 15(3):329-35. PubMed ID: 16784068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. In vitro comparison of aortic heart valve prostheses. Part 1: Mechanical valves.
Knott E; Reul H; Knoch M; Steinseifer U; Rau G
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 1988 Dec; 96(6):952-61. PubMed ID: 3193804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
