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

Journal Abstract Search

160 related items for PubMed ID: 3354445

  • 1. Comparative study of primary tissue failure between porcine (Hancock and Carpentier-Edwards) and bovine pericardial (Ionescu-Shiley) bioprostheses in the aortic position at five- to nine-year follow-up.
    Gallo I, Nistal F, Arbe E, Artiñano E.
    Am J Cardiol; 1988 Apr 01; 61(10):812-6. PubMed ID: 3354445
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Comparative study of primary tissue valve failure between Ionescu-Shiley pericardial and Hancock porcine valves in the aortic position.
    Nistal F, García-Satué E, Artiñano E, Durán CM, Gallo I.
    Am J Cardiol; 1986 Jan 01; 57(1):161-4. PubMed ID: 3942062
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Clinical results of pericardial xenograft valves: the Ionescu-Shiley and Hancock valves.
    Goldman B, Scully H, Tong C, Mandell R, Butany J, Azuma J, Schwartz L.
    Can J Cardiol; 1988 Sep 01; 4(6):328-32. PubMed ID: 3179796
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. A prospective evaluation of the Björk-Shiley, Hancock, and Carpentier-Edwards heart valve prostheses.
    Bloomfield P, Kitchin AH, Wheatley DJ, Walbaum PR, Lutz W, Miller HC.
    Circulation; 1986 Jun 01; 73(6):1213-22. PubMed ID: 3516447
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Aortic valve replacement with the Hancock standard, Björk-Shiley, and Lillehei-Kaster prostheses. A comparison based on follow-up from 1 to 15 years.
    Milano AD, Bortolotti U, Mazzucco A, Guerra F, Magni A, Gallucci V.
    J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 1989 Jul 01; 98(1):37-47. PubMed ID: 2739424
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. A 10-year comparison of mitral valve replacement with Carpentier-Edwards and Hancock porcine bioprostheses.
    Perier P, Deloche A, Chauvaud S, Chachques JC, Relland J, Fabiani JN, Stephan Y, Blondeau P, Carpentier A.
    Ann Thorac Surg; 1989 Jul 01; 48(1):54-9. PubMed ID: 2764601
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Rest and exercise hemodynamics following aortic valve replacement. A comparison between 19 and 21 mm Ionescu-Shiley pericardial and Carpentier-Edwards porcine valves.
    Bove EL, Marvasti MA, Potts JL, Reger MJ, Zamora JL, Eich RH, Parker FB.
    J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 1985 Nov 01; 90(5):750-5. PubMed ID: 4058047
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Double valve Implantation. Long-term evaluation of 8 different bioprostheses.
    Stassano P, Mannacio V, Musumeci A, Golino A, Maida P, Ferrigno V, Buonocore G, Spampinato N.
    Tex Heart Inst J; 1991 Nov 01; 18(1):34-40. PubMed ID: 15227506
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Long-term comparative analysis of the Björk-Shiley and Hancock valves implanted in 1975.
    Martinell J, Fraile J, Artiz V, Moreno J, Rábago G.
    J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 1985 Nov 01; 90(5):741-9. PubMed ID: 4058046
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Porcine valves: Hancock and Carpentier-Edwards aortic prostheses.
    Fann JI, Miller DC.
    Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 1996 Jul 01; 8(3):259-68. PubMed ID: 8843517
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Performance of the Carpentier-Edwards SAV and Hancock-II porcine bioprostheses in aortic valve replacement.
    Jamieson WR, David TE, Feindel CM, Miyagishima RT, Germann E.
    J Heart Valve Dis; 2002 May 01; 11(3):424-30. PubMed ID: 12056738
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Early mechanical failures of the Hancock pericardial xenograft.
    Bortolotti U, Milano A, Thiene G, Guerra F, Mazzucco A, Valente M, Talenti E, Gallucci V.
    J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 1987 Aug 01; 94(2):200-7. PubMed ID: 3613618
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Durability of the Hancock MO bioprosthesis compared with standard aortic valve bioprostheses.
    Yun KL, Miller DC, Moore KA, Mitchell RS, Oyer PE, Stinson EB, Robbins RC, Reitz BA, Shumway NE.
    Ann Thorac Surg; 1995 Aug 01; 60(2 Suppl):S221-8. PubMed ID: 7646163
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Do pericardial bioprostheses improve outcome of elderly patients undergoing aortic valve replacement?
    Said SM, Ashikhmina E, Greason KL, Suri RM, Park SJ, Daly RC, Burkhart HM, Dearani JA, Sundt TM, Schaff HV.
    Ann Thorac Surg; 2012 Jun 01; 93(6):1868-74; discussion 1874-5. PubMed ID: 22440366
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Survival and bioprosthetic valve failure. Ten-year follow-up.
    Teoh KH, Ivanov J, Weisel RD, Darcel IC, Rakowski H.
    Circulation; 1989 Sep 01; 80(3 Pt 1):I8-15. PubMed ID: 2766540
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 8.