The Experts below are selected from a list of 138324 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Tirone E. David - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Does the mitral valve prosthesis adversely affect the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients with double valve replacement
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2012Co-Authors: Konstantinos Spiliotopoulos, Susan Armstrong, Manjula Maganti, Tirone E. DavidAbstract:Objective This study was undertaken to examine the possible adverse effect of the mitral valve prosthesis on the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients who have undergone double valve replacement. Methods Patients who underwent double valve replacement were matched for age, body surface area, left ventricular function, and size and type of aortic valve prosthesis with patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement. Two types of prosthetic valves were examined: the St Jude Medical mechanical valve (St Jude Medical, St Paul, Minn) and the Hancock II bioprosthesis (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn). Five patients for each size and type of aortic valve prosthesis in the double valve replacement group were matched at 1:2 with patients in the isolated aortic valve replacement group. Only valve sizes 21 to 27 were matched. Hemodynamic assessment of the aortic valve prosthesis was performed by transthoracic echocardiogram before hospital discharge. Results Matched patients had similar clinical profiles. There were no differences in the systolic gradients, effective aortic valve areas, or flow velocity across the aortic valve Prostheses after isolated aortic valve replacement or double valve replacement. Conclusions Early after surgery, the hemodynamic performance of aortic valve Prostheses was not affected by the presence of mitral valve Prostheses in patients who underwent combined aortic and mitral valve replacement.
-
Does the mitral valve prosthesis adversely affect the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients with double valve replacement?
The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2011Co-Authors: Konstantinos Spiliotopoulos, Susan Armstrong, Manjula Maganti, Tirone E. DavidAbstract:This study was undertaken to examine the possible adverse effect of the mitral valve prosthesis on the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients who have undergone double valve replacement. Patients who underwent double valve replacement were matched for age, body surface area, left ventricular function, and size and type of aortic valve prosthesis with patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement. Two types of prosthetic valves were examined: the St Jude Medical mechanical valve (St Jude Medical, St Paul, Minn) and the Hancock II bioprosthesis (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn). Five patients for each size and type of aortic valve prosthesis in the double valve replacement group were matched at 1:2 with patients in the isolated aortic valve replacement group. Only valve sizes 21 to 27 were matched. Hemodynamic assessment of the aortic valve prosthesis was performed by transthoracic echocardiogram before hospital discharge. Matched patients had similar clinical profiles. There were no differences in the systolic gradients, effective aortic valve areas, or flow velocity across the aortic valve Prostheses after isolated aortic valve replacement or double valve replacement. Early after surgery, the hemodynamic performance of aortic valve Prostheses was not affected by the presence of mitral valve Prostheses in patients who underwent combined aortic and mitral valve replacement. Copyright © 2012 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Konstantinos Spiliotopoulos - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Does the mitral valve prosthesis adversely affect the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients with double valve replacement
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2012Co-Authors: Konstantinos Spiliotopoulos, Susan Armstrong, Manjula Maganti, Tirone E. DavidAbstract:Objective This study was undertaken to examine the possible adverse effect of the mitral valve prosthesis on the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients who have undergone double valve replacement. Methods Patients who underwent double valve replacement were matched for age, body surface area, left ventricular function, and size and type of aortic valve prosthesis with patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement. Two types of prosthetic valves were examined: the St Jude Medical mechanical valve (St Jude Medical, St Paul, Minn) and the Hancock II bioprosthesis (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn). Five patients for each size and type of aortic valve prosthesis in the double valve replacement group were matched at 1:2 with patients in the isolated aortic valve replacement group. Only valve sizes 21 to 27 were matched. Hemodynamic assessment of the aortic valve prosthesis was performed by transthoracic echocardiogram before hospital discharge. Results Matched patients had similar clinical profiles. There were no differences in the systolic gradients, effective aortic valve areas, or flow velocity across the aortic valve Prostheses after isolated aortic valve replacement or double valve replacement. Conclusions Early after surgery, the hemodynamic performance of aortic valve Prostheses was not affected by the presence of mitral valve Prostheses in patients who underwent combined aortic and mitral valve replacement.
-
Does the mitral valve prosthesis adversely affect the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients with double valve replacement?
The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2011Co-Authors: Konstantinos Spiliotopoulos, Susan Armstrong, Manjula Maganti, Tirone E. DavidAbstract:This study was undertaken to examine the possible adverse effect of the mitral valve prosthesis on the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients who have undergone double valve replacement. Patients who underwent double valve replacement were matched for age, body surface area, left ventricular function, and size and type of aortic valve prosthesis with patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement. Two types of prosthetic valves were examined: the St Jude Medical mechanical valve (St Jude Medical, St Paul, Minn) and the Hancock II bioprosthesis (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn). Five patients for each size and type of aortic valve prosthesis in the double valve replacement group were matched at 1:2 with patients in the isolated aortic valve replacement group. Only valve sizes 21 to 27 were matched. Hemodynamic assessment of the aortic valve prosthesis was performed by transthoracic echocardiogram before hospital discharge. Matched patients had similar clinical profiles. There were no differences in the systolic gradients, effective aortic valve areas, or flow velocity across the aortic valve Prostheses after isolated aortic valve replacement or double valve replacement. Early after surgery, the hemodynamic performance of aortic valve Prostheses was not affected by the presence of mitral valve Prostheses in patients who underwent combined aortic and mitral valve replacement. Copyright © 2012 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Manjula Maganti - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Does the mitral valve prosthesis adversely affect the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients with double valve replacement
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2012Co-Authors: Konstantinos Spiliotopoulos, Susan Armstrong, Manjula Maganti, Tirone E. DavidAbstract:Objective This study was undertaken to examine the possible adverse effect of the mitral valve prosthesis on the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients who have undergone double valve replacement. Methods Patients who underwent double valve replacement were matched for age, body surface area, left ventricular function, and size and type of aortic valve prosthesis with patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement. Two types of prosthetic valves were examined: the St Jude Medical mechanical valve (St Jude Medical, St Paul, Minn) and the Hancock II bioprosthesis (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn). Five patients for each size and type of aortic valve prosthesis in the double valve replacement group were matched at 1:2 with patients in the isolated aortic valve replacement group. Only valve sizes 21 to 27 were matched. Hemodynamic assessment of the aortic valve prosthesis was performed by transthoracic echocardiogram before hospital discharge. Results Matched patients had similar clinical profiles. There were no differences in the systolic gradients, effective aortic valve areas, or flow velocity across the aortic valve Prostheses after isolated aortic valve replacement or double valve replacement. Conclusions Early after surgery, the hemodynamic performance of aortic valve Prostheses was not affected by the presence of mitral valve Prostheses in patients who underwent combined aortic and mitral valve replacement.
-
Does the mitral valve prosthesis adversely affect the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients with double valve replacement?
The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2011Co-Authors: Konstantinos Spiliotopoulos, Susan Armstrong, Manjula Maganti, Tirone E. DavidAbstract:This study was undertaken to examine the possible adverse effect of the mitral valve prosthesis on the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients who have undergone double valve replacement. Patients who underwent double valve replacement were matched for age, body surface area, left ventricular function, and size and type of aortic valve prosthesis with patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement. Two types of prosthetic valves were examined: the St Jude Medical mechanical valve (St Jude Medical, St Paul, Minn) and the Hancock II bioprosthesis (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn). Five patients for each size and type of aortic valve prosthesis in the double valve replacement group were matched at 1:2 with patients in the isolated aortic valve replacement group. Only valve sizes 21 to 27 were matched. Hemodynamic assessment of the aortic valve prosthesis was performed by transthoracic echocardiogram before hospital discharge. Matched patients had similar clinical profiles. There were no differences in the systolic gradients, effective aortic valve areas, or flow velocity across the aortic valve Prostheses after isolated aortic valve replacement or double valve replacement. Early after surgery, the hemodynamic performance of aortic valve Prostheses was not affected by the presence of mitral valve Prostheses in patients who underwent combined aortic and mitral valve replacement. Copyright © 2012 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Susan Armstrong - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Does the mitral valve prosthesis adversely affect the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients with double valve replacement
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2012Co-Authors: Konstantinos Spiliotopoulos, Susan Armstrong, Manjula Maganti, Tirone E. DavidAbstract:Objective This study was undertaken to examine the possible adverse effect of the mitral valve prosthesis on the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients who have undergone double valve replacement. Methods Patients who underwent double valve replacement were matched for age, body surface area, left ventricular function, and size and type of aortic valve prosthesis with patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement. Two types of prosthetic valves were examined: the St Jude Medical mechanical valve (St Jude Medical, St Paul, Minn) and the Hancock II bioprosthesis (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn). Five patients for each size and type of aortic valve prosthesis in the double valve replacement group were matched at 1:2 with patients in the isolated aortic valve replacement group. Only valve sizes 21 to 27 were matched. Hemodynamic assessment of the aortic valve prosthesis was performed by transthoracic echocardiogram before hospital discharge. Results Matched patients had similar clinical profiles. There were no differences in the systolic gradients, effective aortic valve areas, or flow velocity across the aortic valve Prostheses after isolated aortic valve replacement or double valve replacement. Conclusions Early after surgery, the hemodynamic performance of aortic valve Prostheses was not affected by the presence of mitral valve Prostheses in patients who underwent combined aortic and mitral valve replacement.
-
Does the mitral valve prosthesis adversely affect the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients with double valve replacement?
The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2011Co-Authors: Konstantinos Spiliotopoulos, Susan Armstrong, Manjula Maganti, Tirone E. DavidAbstract:This study was undertaken to examine the possible adverse effect of the mitral valve prosthesis on the hemodynamic performance of the aortic valve prosthesis in patients who have undergone double valve replacement. Patients who underwent double valve replacement were matched for age, body surface area, left ventricular function, and size and type of aortic valve prosthesis with patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement. Two types of prosthetic valves were examined: the St Jude Medical mechanical valve (St Jude Medical, St Paul, Minn) and the Hancock II bioprosthesis (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn). Five patients for each size and type of aortic valve prosthesis in the double valve replacement group were matched at 1:2 with patients in the isolated aortic valve replacement group. Only valve sizes 21 to 27 were matched. Hemodynamic assessment of the aortic valve prosthesis was performed by transthoracic echocardiogram before hospital discharge. Matched patients had similar clinical profiles. There were no differences in the systolic gradients, effective aortic valve areas, or flow velocity across the aortic valve Prostheses after isolated aortic valve replacement or double valve replacement. Early after surgery, the hemodynamic performance of aortic valve Prostheses was not affected by the presence of mitral valve Prostheses in patients who underwent combined aortic and mitral valve replacement. Copyright © 2012 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Rene Verdonk - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the oxford unicompartmental knee prosthesis an independent 10 year survival analysis
Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 2006Co-Authors: P Vorlat, Filip Gheysen, Guy Putzeys, Dominique Cottenie, Tom Van Isacker, F Handelberg, Pierre Paul Casteleyn, Nicole Pouliart, Rene VerdonkAbstract:One hundred forty-nine medial Prostheses were implanted in 140 patients between 1988 and 1996. After a mean of 67 months 28 patients had died, without the need for revision. Seventeen Prostheses were lost to follow-up. Revision surgery using a total knee prosthesis was performed in 16 cases. In four others, a lateral prosthesis was implanted subsequently to a medial one. One of these four was revised to a total knee prosthesis 6 years later. In another four cases, late complications of the meniscal bearing were treated with replacement of this bearing. The surviving Prostheses were seen back after a mean of 126 months. The cumulative survival rate at 10 years was 82% for the whole population and 84% when knees with a previous high tibial osteotomy were excluded. Since these results compare poorly to the survival of total knee arthroplasty, this prosthesis is not the first-choice implant. Because it preserves a maximum of bone stock and is revised to a total prosthesis almost without difficulty, it is the first-choice implant for medial unicompartmental osteoarthritis in patients younger than 65. Further research is mandatory to confirm that this prosthesis very rarely needs revision in patients older than 75. It should not be used in osteotomized knees.