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
224 related items for PubMed ID: 8964992
21. 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 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. 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 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Randomized, prospective assessment of bioprosthetic valve durability. Hancock versus Carpentier-Edwards valves. Sarris GE, Robbins RC, Miller DC, Mitchell RS, Moore KA, Stinson EB, Oyer PE, Reitz BA, Shumway NE. Circulation; 1993 Nov; 88(5 Pt 2):II55-64. PubMed ID: 8222197 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Porcine versus pericardial bioprostheses: eleven-year follow up of a prospective randomized trial. Chaudhry MA, Raco L, Muriithi EW, Bernacca GM, Tolland MM, Wheatley DJ. J Heart Valve Dis; 2000 May; 9(3):429-37; discussion 437-8. PubMed ID: 10888102 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Carpentier-Edwards standard porcine bioprosthesis: clinical performance to seventeen years. Jamieson WR, Munro AI, Miyagishima RT, Allen P, Burr LH, Tyers GF. Ann Thorac Surg; 1995 Oct; 60(4):999-1006; discussion 1007. PubMed ID: 7575007 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. The Mitroflow pericardial bioprosthesis. Comparison of early clinical performance in aortic and mitral positions. Jamieson WR, Pelletier LC, Gerein AN, Pomar J. Can J Surg; 1992 Apr; 35(2):159-64. PubMed ID: 1562925 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Heart valve replacement--a report of 8- to 17-year follow-up. Kimura M, Kitasato K, Kamatani M. Igaku Kenkyu; 1992 Apr; 62(2):57-64. PubMed ID: 1523944 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Clinical durability of the Hancock porcine bioprosthetic valve. Oyer PE, Miller DC, Stinson EB, Reitz BA, Moreno-Cabral RJ, Shumway NE. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 1980 Dec; 80(6):824-33. PubMed ID: 7431981 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. 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; 94(2):200-7. PubMed ID: 3613618 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Twenty-year results of the Hancock II bioprosthesis. Borger MA, Ivanov J, Armstrong S, Christie-Hrybinsky D, Feindel CM, David TE. J Heart Valve Dis; 2006 Jan; 15(1):49-55; discussion 55-6. PubMed ID: 16480012 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Age as a determinant for selection of porcine bioprostheses for cardiac valve replacement: experience with Carpentier-Edwards standard bioprosthesis. Jamieson WR, Tyers GF, Janusz MT, Miyagishima RT, Munro AI, Ling H, Burr LH, Tutassaura H. Can J Cardiol; 1991 May; 7(4):181-8. PubMed ID: 2070287 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]