These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
70 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7719513)
1. Which patients will require two or more reoperations for structural valve deterioration of porcine bioprostheses? Smith JA; Mitchell RS; Miller DC J Heart Valve Dis; 1993 Nov; 2(6):705. PubMed ID: 7719513 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Lack of durability of the Mitroflow valve does not affect survival. Houel R; Le Besnerais P; Soustelle C; Kirsch M; Hillion ML; Loisance D J Heart Valve Dis; 1999 Jul; 8(4):368-74; discussion 374-5. PubMed ID: 10461235 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Late incidence and determinants of reoperation in patients with prosthetic heart valves. Ruel M; Kulik A; Rubens FD; Bédard P; Masters RG; Pipe AL; Mesana TG Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 2004 Mar; 25(3):364-70. PubMed ID: 15019662 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Seventeen-year experience with the St. Jude medical biocor porcine bioprosthesis. Mykén PS J Heart Valve Dis; 2005 Jul; 14(4):486-92. PubMed ID: 16116875 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Mitral valve disease: if the mitral valve is not reparable/failed repair, is bioprosthesis suitable for replacement? Jamieson WR; Gudas VM; Burr LH; Janusz MT; Fradet GJ; Ling H; Germann E; Lichtenstein SV Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 2009 Jan; 35(1):104-10. PubMed ID: 19056294 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Twenty-year clinical experience with porcine bioprostheses. Fann JI; Miller DC; Moore KA; Mitchell RS; Oyer PE; Stinson EB; Robbins RC; Reitz BA; Shumway NE Ann Thorac Surg; 1996 Nov; 62(5):1301-11; discussion 1311-2. PubMed ID: 8893561 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [The long term (15 years) evolution after valvular replacement with mechanical prosthesis or bioprosthesis between the age of 60 and 70 years]. Hanania G; Michel PL; Montély JM; Warembourg H; Nardi O; Leguerrier A; Agnino A; Despins P; Legault B; Petit H; Bouraindeloup M; Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss; 2004 Jan; 97(1):7-14. PubMed ID: 15002704 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Biological versus mechanical aortic prosthesis? A nineteen-year comparison in a propensity-matched population. Bottio T; Rizzoli G; Caprili L; Testolin L; Thiene G; Gerosa G J Heart Valve Dis; 2005 Jul; 14(4):493-500. PubMed ID: 16116876 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Aortic valve-sparing repair with autologous pericardial leaflet extension has low long-term mortality and reoperation rates in children and adults. Cohen O; De La Zerda DJ; Odim J; Dinov I; Laks H Heart Surg Forum; 2007; 10(4):E288-91. PubMed ID: 17599876 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Late results of heart valve replacement with the Hancock II bioprosthesis. David TE; Ivanov J; Armstrong S; Feindel CM; Cohen G J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2001 Feb; 121(2):268-77. PubMed ID: 11174732 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Simultaneous aortic and mitral valve replacement: predictors of adverse outcome. Kuwaki K; Tsukamoto M; Komatsu K; Morishita K; Sakata J; Abe T J Heart Valve Dis; 2003 Mar; 12(2):169-76. PubMed ID: 12701788 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]