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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The pulmonary bioprosthetic heart valve: its unsuitability for use as an aortic valve replacement.
    Author: Jennings LM, Butterfield M, Booth C, Watterson KG, Fisher J.
    Journal: J Heart Valve Dis; 2002 Sep; 11(5):668-78; discussion 679. PubMed ID: 12358404.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The porcine pulmonary bioprosthetic heart valve represents an alternative means of aortic valve replacement (AVR), though knowledge of its biomechanical function and characteristics is limited. The valve has potential advantages over the aortic bioprosthesis; notably, it lacks the muscular shelf of the right coronary cusp of the latter bioprosthesis. The study aim was to investigate the suitability of the porcine pulmonary bioprosthetic valve for AVR. METHODS: Porcine pulmonary and aortic roots were zero pressure-fixed with 0.5% buffered glutaraldehyde, characterized, and compared with fresh porcine pulmonary and aortic roots. The in-vitro analysis included assessment of mechanical properties, hydrodynamic function, geometry of the pulmonary root, and durability. RESULTS: The fixed pulmonary roots and fresh aortic roots were similar in certain aspects of mechanical response, notably leaflets in the radial direction and the root wall. The fixed pulmonary root was slightly more compliant than the fixed aortic root, and this led to an improvement in forward flow hydrodynamic function. The reverse flow hydrodynamic function of the pulmonary roots was poor; fresh pulmonary roots exhibited a trivial closed valve regurgitant volume. On fixation, this characteristic was aggravated, leading to a gross closed valve regurgitant volume in 50% of all fixed pulmonary roots. The cause of leakage was identified as a prolapsed anterior leaflet. Durability of the fixed pulmonary root was also inferior to that of the fixed aortic root; three fixed pulmonary roots subjected to accelerated fatigue testing showed signs of leaflet macroscopic damage. CONCLUSION: Overall, the performance of the porcine pulmonary bioprosthesis was far inferior to that of the currently used porcine aortic bioprosthesis. Hence, the porcine pulmonary bioprosthetic valve was deemed unsuitable for AVR.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]