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: Long-term results after Starr-Edwards mitral valve replacement in children aged 5 years or younger.
    Author: Higashita R, Ichikawa S, Niinami H, Ban T, Suda Y, Takeuchi Y.
    Journal: Ann Thorac Surg; 2003 Mar; 75(3):826-9. PubMed ID: 12645701.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Mitral valve replacement with prosthetic valves in infants and children requires consideration of multiple variables. When we examined our late follow-up, the effect of the growth of the patient relative to the size of the prosthesis placed was the most important variable predicting late successful results. We reviewed our experience with mitral valve replacement using the Starr-Edwards ball valve in children aged 5 years or younger, focusing on the effect of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch on the long-term results in the growing patient. METHODS: From August 1974 to June 1986, 8 patients aged 5 years or younger underwent mitral valve replacements using the Starr-Edwards prosthesis size OM in 3 patients and 1M in 5 patients. Model 6320 was used in 1 patient and Model 6120 in the remaining 7 patients. RESULTS: Follow-up was 100% from 15 to 27 years (mean, 20 years). No valve-related complications of thromboembolism, anticoagulant-related hemorrhage, or prosthetic valve endocarditis were seen. All patients normally developed to adult size. The range of the valve area index of the 3 patients who received the smaller Starr-Edwards valve (size OM) was 0.97 to 1.24 cm2/m2. Although this size valve was adequate for patient growth to adolescence, in each case valve replacement with a larger valve was required. CONCLUSIONS: Our long-term review of Starr-Edwards ball valve mitral valve replacement in children aged 5 years or younger shows that the Starr-Edwards ball valve (Models 6320 [1 patient] and 6120 [7 patients]) showed excellent durability, no thromboembolism, and no anticoagulant-related complications. Size OM valves required replacement for hemodynamic reasons because of patient growth; larger size 1M valves remained hemodynamically satisfactory in spite of patient growth.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]