Experimental and clinical evaluations of the optimum combination in size and type of prostheses on double valve replacement

N. Kitamura, Mitsuo Umezu, H. Koyanagi, A. Hashimoto, K. Tsuchiya, J. Wada

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The hemodynamics in combined aortic and mitral valve replacement was studied experimentally with Bjork-Shiley valve and silicon ball valve in circulatory mechanical simulator. According to the results, the hemodynamically best combination was a ball valve used as aortic valve and Bjork-Shiley valve as mitral valve, and the combination of Bjork-Shiley valve alone should be carefully employed for combined aortic and mitral valve replacement to a case with serious risk, because the perivalvular leakage particular to this valve is unexpectedly large. There is an optimum combination of Bjork-Shiley valves as to the size for minimizing the load to left ventricle. The optimum combinations were found to be 23A-29M, 21A-27M,19A-25M or 23M, and 17A-21M, respectively. Our clinical cases of combined aortic and mitral valve replacement were reviewed, referring to the above-described experimental results: the cases in which Starr-Edwards ball valves were used as aortic valve and Bjork-Shiley valves were used as mitral valve had much better prognoses than cases in which Bjork-Shiley valves were used in both aortic and mitral position. Even though Bjork-Shiley valves were used for both aortic and mitral valves, in the cases in which the optimum valve size combination shown above were chosen, prognoses were much better than cases in which the optimum combinations were not used. These clinical data were well coincident with our in vitro experimental results. Thus, it must be emphasized that the combinations of valves as to the type and the size should be carefully selected for improving the clinical results of combined aortic and mitral valve replacements.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)177-192
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Cardiovascular Surgery
Volume19
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 1978
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Aortic Valve
Mitral Valve
Prostheses and Implants
Silicon
Heart Ventricles
Hemodynamics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Experimental and clinical evaluations of the optimum combination in size and type of prostheses on double valve replacement. / Kitamura, N.; Umezu, Mitsuo; Koyanagi, H.; Hashimoto, A.; Tsuchiya, K.; Wada, J.

In: Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery, Vol. 19, No. 2, 1978, p. 177-192.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kitamura, N. ; Umezu, Mitsuo ; Koyanagi, H. ; Hashimoto, A. ; Tsuchiya, K. ; Wada, J. / Experimental and clinical evaluations of the optimum combination in size and type of prostheses on double valve replacement. In: Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery. 1978 ; Vol. 19, No. 2. pp. 177-192.
@article{9c4d8a9ff561435c86b19de7507cf73d,
title = "Experimental and clinical evaluations of the optimum combination in size and type of prostheses on double valve replacement",
abstract = "The hemodynamics in combined aortic and mitral valve replacement was studied experimentally with Bjork-Shiley valve and silicon ball valve in circulatory mechanical simulator. According to the results, the hemodynamically best combination was a ball valve used as aortic valve and Bjork-Shiley valve as mitral valve, and the combination of Bjork-Shiley valve alone should be carefully employed for combined aortic and mitral valve replacement to a case with serious risk, because the perivalvular leakage particular to this valve is unexpectedly large. There is an optimum combination of Bjork-Shiley valves as to the size for minimizing the load to left ventricle. The optimum combinations were found to be 23A-29M, 21A-27M,19A-25M or 23M, and 17A-21M, respectively. Our clinical cases of combined aortic and mitral valve replacement were reviewed, referring to the above-described experimental results: the cases in which Starr-Edwards ball valves were used as aortic valve and Bjork-Shiley valves were used as mitral valve had much better prognoses than cases in which Bjork-Shiley valves were used in both aortic and mitral position. Even though Bjork-Shiley valves were used for both aortic and mitral valves, in the cases in which the optimum valve size combination shown above were chosen, prognoses were much better than cases in which the optimum combinations were not used. These clinical data were well coincident with our in vitro experimental results. Thus, it must be emphasized that the combinations of valves as to the type and the size should be carefully selected for improving the clinical results of combined aortic and mitral valve replacements.",
author = "N. Kitamura and Mitsuo Umezu and H. Koyanagi and A. Hashimoto and K. Tsuchiya and J. Wada",
year = "1978",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "177--192",
journal = "Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery",
issn = "0021-9509",
publisher = "Edizioni Minerva Medica S.p.A.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Experimental and clinical evaluations of the optimum combination in size and type of prostheses on double valve replacement

AU - Kitamura, N.

AU - Umezu, Mitsuo

AU - Koyanagi, H.

AU - Hashimoto, A.

AU - Tsuchiya, K.

AU - Wada, J.

PY - 1978

Y1 - 1978

N2 - The hemodynamics in combined aortic and mitral valve replacement was studied experimentally with Bjork-Shiley valve and silicon ball valve in circulatory mechanical simulator. According to the results, the hemodynamically best combination was a ball valve used as aortic valve and Bjork-Shiley valve as mitral valve, and the combination of Bjork-Shiley valve alone should be carefully employed for combined aortic and mitral valve replacement to a case with serious risk, because the perivalvular leakage particular to this valve is unexpectedly large. There is an optimum combination of Bjork-Shiley valves as to the size for minimizing the load to left ventricle. The optimum combinations were found to be 23A-29M, 21A-27M,19A-25M or 23M, and 17A-21M, respectively. Our clinical cases of combined aortic and mitral valve replacement were reviewed, referring to the above-described experimental results: the cases in which Starr-Edwards ball valves were used as aortic valve and Bjork-Shiley valves were used as mitral valve had much better prognoses than cases in which Bjork-Shiley valves were used in both aortic and mitral position. Even though Bjork-Shiley valves were used for both aortic and mitral valves, in the cases in which the optimum valve size combination shown above were chosen, prognoses were much better than cases in which the optimum combinations were not used. These clinical data were well coincident with our in vitro experimental results. Thus, it must be emphasized that the combinations of valves as to the type and the size should be carefully selected for improving the clinical results of combined aortic and mitral valve replacements.

AB - The hemodynamics in combined aortic and mitral valve replacement was studied experimentally with Bjork-Shiley valve and silicon ball valve in circulatory mechanical simulator. According to the results, the hemodynamically best combination was a ball valve used as aortic valve and Bjork-Shiley valve as mitral valve, and the combination of Bjork-Shiley valve alone should be carefully employed for combined aortic and mitral valve replacement to a case with serious risk, because the perivalvular leakage particular to this valve is unexpectedly large. There is an optimum combination of Bjork-Shiley valves as to the size for minimizing the load to left ventricle. The optimum combinations were found to be 23A-29M, 21A-27M,19A-25M or 23M, and 17A-21M, respectively. Our clinical cases of combined aortic and mitral valve replacement were reviewed, referring to the above-described experimental results: the cases in which Starr-Edwards ball valves were used as aortic valve and Bjork-Shiley valves were used as mitral valve had much better prognoses than cases in which Bjork-Shiley valves were used in both aortic and mitral position. Even though Bjork-Shiley valves were used for both aortic and mitral valves, in the cases in which the optimum valve size combination shown above were chosen, prognoses were much better than cases in which the optimum combinations were not used. These clinical data were well coincident with our in vitro experimental results. Thus, it must be emphasized that the combinations of valves as to the type and the size should be carefully selected for improving the clinical results of combined aortic and mitral valve replacements.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0017801077&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0017801077&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 659494

AN - SCOPUS:0017801077

VL - 19

SP - 177

EP - 192

JO - Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery

JF - Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery

SN - 0021-9509

IS - 2

ER -