Shimoyama Y, Wanibuchi Y, Ino T, Terada Y, Takagi H, Furuta S
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mitsui Memorial Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Nihon Geka Gakkai Zasshi. 1989 Sep;90(9):1529-33.
The long-term results of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) with a mechanical valve (AM), mitral valve replacement with a biological valve (MB), and tricuspid valve replacement (TVR) with a biological valve (TB) operated upon from 1977 to 1988 were retrospectively analysed. A total of 899 patients received 1117 valves (381 AM, 633 TB, 103 TB) with a follow-up 3778 patient-years and 4582 valve-years. A significant incidence of thromboembolism, hemorrhage, and endocarditis was not found among AVR, MVR, TVR, or multiple valve replacement. We found a significantly decreased incidence of survival rate in multiple valve replacement compared with AVR or MVR, and a significantly increased incidence of reoperation in MB compared with AM and TB. We use AM and TB in any adult patients as a first choice. However, we prefer a mechanical valve in the mitral position except in patients over 65 years old, who have a short life expectancy, in whom anticoagulation is thought to be difficult, and who desire a biological valve.
回顾性分析了1977年至1988年接受机械瓣主动脉瓣置换术(AM)、生物瓣二尖瓣置换术(MB)和生物瓣三尖瓣置换术(TB)患者的长期结果。共有899例患者接受了1117枚瓣膜(381枚AM、633枚TB、103枚TB),随访时间为3778患者年和4582瓣膜年。在主动脉瓣置换术、二尖瓣置换术、三尖瓣置换术或多瓣膜置换术中未发现血栓栓塞、出血和心内膜炎的显著发生率。我们发现与主动脉瓣置换术或二尖瓣置换术相比,多瓣膜置换术的生存率显著降低,与AM和TB相比,MB的再次手术发生率显著增加。我们将AM和TB作为任何成年患者的首选。然而,除了65岁以上、预期寿命短、认为抗凝困难且希望使用生物瓣的患者外,我们更倾向于在二尖瓣位置使用机械瓣。