Advertisement





Click here for more guidelines.
CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home
     

J Am Coll Cardiol, 2001; 37:1963-1966
© 2001 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nötzold, A.
Right arrow Articles by Sievers, H.-H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nötzold, A.
Right arrow Articles by Sievers, H.-H.

CLINICAL STUDY: VALVE DISEASE

Quality of life in aortic valve replacement: pulmonary autografts versus mechanical prostheses

Axel Nötzold, MDa, Michael Hüppe, MDa, Claudia Schmidtke, MDa, Petra Blömer, MDa, Thomas Uhlig, MDa and Hans-Hinrich Sievers, MD, FETCSa

a Departments of Cardiac Surgery and Anesthesiology, Medical University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany

Manuscript received November 10, 2000; revised manuscript received February 15, 2001, accepted February 26, 2001.

Reprint requests and correspondence: Prof. Dr. H.-H. Sievers, Klinik für Herzchirurgie, Medizinische Universität zu Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538 Lübeck, Germany.
noetzold{at}medinf.mu-luebeck.de

OBJECTIVES

We sought to determine whether the quality of life (QoL) is different in patients after aortic valve replacement with mechanical prostheses or pulmonary autografts.

BACKGROUND

Quality of life after mechanical valve replacement may be affected by the risk of thromboembolism and anticoagulation, and after autograft implantation, by the risk of degeneration and re-operation especially of the homograft.

METHODS

Two groups of 40 patients each—one after the autograft procedure (group I) and one after mechanical valve implantation (group II)—were matched for age, gender and length of follow-up. At latest follow-up, all patients underwent routine echocardiography, the short-form health survey (SF-36) QoL survey and an extensive psychological investigation.

RESULTS

Patients with an autograft showed better QoL scales, as compared with mechanical valve recipients. The difference was significant for both the physical (72.72 ± 20.00 vs. 60.27 ± 26.07, p = 0.021) and psychological health sum scores (74.71 ± 21.03 vs. 64.71 ± 23.49, p = 0.046) and for the subtests of physical functioning (73.72 ± 22.44 vs. 62.77 ± 25.42, p = 0.049), physical pain (88.39 ± 19.13 vs. 73.36 ± 27.08, p ≤ 0.006), general health perception (64.37 ± 17.88 vs. 51.86 ± 22.86, p ≤ 0.008) and health change (61.89 ± 18.94 vs. 50.11 ± 24.37, p = 0.02). The QoL variables did not correlate to pressure gradients, ejection fraction and New York Heart Association functional class. Psychometric tests revealed no meaningful differences between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides some evidence that patients with pulmonary autografts have greater benefit in terms of QoL, as compared with recipients of mechanical valve substitutes.

Abbreviations and Acronyms
  EBF-24 = Stress-Recovery Questionnaire
  EF = ejection fraction
  FPI-R = Freiburg Personality Inventory
  NYHA = New York Heart Association
  QoL = quality of life
  SF-36 = Short-Form Health Survey
  SVF-66 = Stress-Coping Questionnaire




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
SEMIN CARDIOTHORAC VASC ANESTHHome page
C. Gorman Koch, F. Khandwala, and E. H. Blackstone
Health-Related Quality of Life After Cardiac Surgery
Seminars in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, September 1, 2008; 12(3): 203 - 217.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
HeartHome page
I Florath, A Albert, U Rosendahl, T Alexander, I C Ennker, and J Ennker
Mid term outcome and quality of life after aortic valve replacement in elderly people: mechanical versus stentless biological valves
Heart, August 1, 2005; 91(8): 1023 - 1029.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
C. G. Koch, F. Khandwala, F. G. Estafanous, F. D. Loop, and E. H. Blackstone
Impact of Prosthesis-Patient Size on Functional Recovery After Aortic Valve Replacement
Circulation, June 21, 2005; 111(24): 3221 - 3229.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.Home page
A. Sedrakyan, P. Hebert, V. Vaccarino, A. D. Paltiel, J. A. Elefteriades, J. Mattera, Z. Lin, S. A. Roumanis, and H. M. Krumholz
Quality of life after aortic valve replacement with tissue and mechanical implants
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., August 1, 2004; 128(2): 266 - 272.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



 
  CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home

Advertisement