scholarly journals Exercise Hemodynamics and Quality of Life after Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis in the Elderly Using the Hancock II Bioprosthesis

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodore Long ◽  
Becky M. Lopez ◽  
Christopher Berberian ◽  
Mark J. Cunningham ◽  
Vaughn A. Starnes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Functional Classification ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Sf 36

Background and Aim. While aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis can be performed safely in elderly patients, there is a need for hemodynamic and quality of life evaluation to determine the value of aortic valve replacement in older patients who may have age-related activity limitation.Materials and Methods. We conducted a prospective evaluation of patients who underwent aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis with the Hancock II porcine bioprosthesis. All patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and completed the RAND 36-Item Health Survey (SF-36) preoperatively and six months postoperatively.Results. From 2004 to 2007, 33 patients were enrolled with an average age of 75.3 ± 5.3 years (24 men and 9 women). Preoperatively, 27/33 (82%) were New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Classification 3, and postoperatively 27/33 (82%) were NYHA Functional Classification 1. Patients had a mean predicted maximumVO2(mL/kg/min) of 19.5 ± 4.3 and an actual maxVO2of 15.5 ± 3.9, which was 80% of the predictedVO2. Patients were found to have significant improvements (P≤0.01) in six of the nine SF-36 health parameters.Conclusions. In our sample of elderly patients with aortic stenosis, replacing the aortic valve with a Hancock II bioprosthesis resulted in improved hemodynamics and quality of life.

Does patient–prosthesis mismatch after aortic valve replacement affect survival and quality of life in elderly patients?

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Sportelli ◽  
Tommaso Regesta ◽  
Antonio Salsano ◽  
Paola Ghione ◽  
Carlotta Brega ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Patient Prosthesis Mismatch

scholarly journals Heart Team for Optimal Management of Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis—Long-Term Outcomes and Quality of Life from Tertiary Cardiovascular Care Center

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (22) ◽  
pp. 5408
Author(s):  
Szymon Jonik ◽  
Michał Marchel ◽  
Ewa Pędzich-Placha ◽  
Zenon Huczek ◽  
Janusz Kochman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Severe Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Heart Team ◽  
Secondary Endpoints

Background: This retrospective study was proposed to investigate outcomes of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) after implementation of various treatment strategies following dedicated Heart Team (HT) decisions. Methods: Primary and secondary endpoints and quality of life during a median follow-up of 866 days of patients with severe AS qualified after HT discussion to: optimal medical treatment (OMT) alone, OMT and transcather aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or OMT and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) were evaluated. As the primary endpoint composite of all-cause mortality, non-fatal disabling strokes and non-fatal rehospitalizations for AS were considered, while other clinical outcomes were determined as secondary endpoints. Results: From 2016 to 2019, 176 HT meetings were held, and a total of 482 participants with severe AS and completely implemented HT decisions (OMT, TAVR and SAVR for 79, 318 and 85, respectively) were included in the final analysis. SAVR and TAVR were found to be superior to OMT for primary and all secondary endpoints (p < 0.05). Comparing interventional strategies only, TAVR was associated with reduced risk of acute kidney injury, new onset of atrial fibrillation and major bleeding, while the superiority of SAVR for major vascular complications and need for permanent pacemaker implantation was observed (p < 0.05). The quality of life assessed at the end of follow-up was significantly better for patients who underwent TAVR or SAVR than in OMT-group (p < 0.05). Conclusions: We demonstrated that after careful implementation of HT decisions interventional strategies compared to OMT only provide superior outcomes and quality of life for patients with AS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document