Horstkotte D
Z Kardiol. 1985;74 Suppl 6:19-37.
Thirty years of effort to obtain better substitutes for destroyed human heart valves brought continuous improvement of the various designs and materials used for the prostheses. However, none of the mechanical or tissue valves currently available meet all the requirements of an ideal artificial heart valve. Accurate comparison of results after implantation of mechanical and tissue valves is difficult because there are no randomized studies and most of the published results are gathered from patient groups operated on in different centers and over different time frames. Reliable comparison therefore presumes criteria to assess the success of valve replacement. The late outcome of heart valve replacement can be determined by subjective improvement, improvement of functional capacity and central hemodynamics, normalization of impaired ventricular function and by the frequency of complications related to or induced by the prostheses. Subjective improvement and improvement of functional capacity is obviously dependent on the degree of postoperative normalization of the hemodynamics. The hemodynamic properties of modern mechanical prostheses are superior to those of tissue valves because of the significantly more favourable relation between total prosthetic valve area and effective prosthetic valve orifice area, conditioned by design. These unfavourable hemodynamics are manifest especially when prostheses of smaller sizes are implanted. The main disadvantage of biological valves is their limited durability due to calcification with tissue damage resulting in degeneration and dysfunction. In addition to the risk of re-operation of tissue valves, for some patients hemodynamical deterioration with consecutive decrease of their functional capacity must be expected a considerable time before a second operation is mandatory. When compared with tissue valves, the most important disadvantage of mechanical valves is their thrombogenicity with the need for life-long anticoagulation therapy. However, the majority of patients with tissue valves do also require long-term anticoagulation because of factors allied by itself with an increased risk of thromboembolism. According to these advantages and disadvantages of mechanical and tissue valves, a differential therapy and an individualized approach should be preferred. Mechanical valves seem to be favourable in young patients, in patients with atrial fibrillation, high risk of reoperation or those in whom only small sized valves can be implanted.
三十年来,人们一直致力于寻找更好的替代品来替代受损的人体心脏瓣膜,这使得用于制作假体的各种设计和材料不断改进。然而,目前可用的机械瓣膜和组织瓣膜都无法完全满足理想人工心脏瓣膜的所有要求。由于缺乏随机对照研究,且大多数已发表的结果是从不同中心、不同时间段接受手术的患者群体中收集而来的,因此很难对机械瓣膜和组织瓣膜植入后的效果进行准确比较。所以,可靠的比较需要有评估瓣膜置换成功与否的标准。心脏瓣膜置换的远期效果可以通过主观改善情况、功能能力的提升、中心血流动力学的改善、受损心室功能的恢复正常以及与假体相关或由假体引发的并发症发生率来判定。主观改善和功能能力的提升显然取决于术后血流动力学的正常化程度。现代机械瓣膜的血流动力学特性优于组织瓣膜,这是因为在设计条件下,总的人工瓣膜面积与有效人工瓣膜开口面积之间的关系更为有利。当植入较小尺寸的假体时,这些不利的血流动力学表现尤为明显。生物瓣膜的主要缺点是其耐久性有限,因为钙化会导致组织损伤,进而引发退化和功能障碍。除了组织瓣膜再次手术的风险外,对于一些患者来说,在必须进行第二次手术之前的相当长一段时间内,预计会出现血流动力学恶化以及随之而来的功能能力下降。与组织瓣膜相比,机械瓣膜最重要的缺点是其血栓形成性,需要终身进行抗凝治疗。然而,由于一些自身因素会增加血栓栓塞的风险,大多数植入组织瓣膜的患者也需要长期抗凝治疗。根据机械瓣膜和组织瓣膜的这些优缺点,应优先采用差异化治疗和个体化方法。机械瓣膜似乎对年轻患者、患有心房颤动的患者、再次手术风险高的患者或只能植入小尺寸瓣膜的患者更为有利。