Key result
The Bioflo 19 mm pericardial aortic valve bioprosthesis caused significantly greater mean pressure drops (24.6 vs 11.7 mmHg) and smaller valve areas (0.82 vs 1.19 cm2) than the Ionescu-Shiley valve.
Why the study?
How do the hemodynamics of different designs of 19 mm pericardial aortic valve bioprostheses compare?
Population
47 resting patients with 19 mm pericardial aortic valve bioprostheses
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
These hemodynamic differences may influence valve selection in small annuli; leaves open long-term outcome comparisons.
Observational (n=47)
How do the hemodynamics of different designs of 19 mm pericardial aortic valve bioprostheses compare?
Different designs of 19 mm pericardial aortic valve bioprostheses exhibit varying hemodynamic profiles, with the Bioflo design showing greater pressure drops and smaller valve areas.
González‐Juanatey et al. (1996) conducted an observational in Patients with 19 mm pericardial aortic valve bioprostheses (n=47). Bioflo 19 mm pericardial aortic valve bioprosthesis vs. Other 19 mm pericardial aortic valve bioprostheses (e.g., Ionescu-Shiley) was evaluated on Hemodynamic parameters including transvalvular pressure drop and valve area. The Bioflo 19 mm pericardial aortic valve bioprosthesis caused significantly greater mean pressure drops (24.6 vs 11.7 mmHg) and smaller valve areas (0.82 vs 1.19 cm2) than the Ionescu-Shiley valve.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: