Quality of life after aortic valve replacement

References

• Mehta RII, Bruckman D, Das S etal. Implications of increased left ventricular mass index on in-hospital outcomes in patients undergoing aortic valve surgery. Thorac. Carrhovasc. Surg. 122(5), 919–928 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Dalrymple-Hay MJ, Alzetani A, Aboel- Nazar S, Haw M, Livesey S, Monro J. Cardiac surgery in the elderly. Eur. Carrhothorac. Surg. 15(1), 61–66 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Glock Y, Pecoul R, Cerene A, Laguerre J, Puel P Aortic valve replacement in elderly patients. Carrhovarc. Stag. 25(3), 205–210 (1984).
   Google Scholar
• Glock Y, Faik M, Laghzaoui A, Moali I, Roux D, Fournial G. Cardiac surgery in the ninth decade of life. Can:liovasc Surg. 4(2), 241–245 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Bonow RO, Carabello B, de Leon AC et al. ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease. Executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease). j Heart Valve Dis. 7(6), 672–707 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Mc MI. Aortic stenosis: a post mortem cinephotographic study of valve action. BE Hear t I 17(1), 56–62 (1955).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rahimtoola SH. Perspective on valvular heart disease: an update. j Am. Coll Canliol. 14(1), 1–23 (1989).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Passik CS, Ackermann DM, Pluth JR, Edwards WD. Temporal changes in the causes of aortic stenosis: a surgical pathologic study of 646 cases. Mayo Gun. Proc. 62(2), 119–123 (1987).
   Google Scholar
• Iivanainen AM, Lindroos M, Tilvis R, Heikkila J, Kupari M. Natural history of aortic valve stenosis of varying severity in the elderly. Am.j Cardiol 78(1), 97–101 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Lindroos M, Kupari M, Heikkila J, Tilvis R. Prevalence of aortic valve abnormalities in the elderly: an echocardiographic study of a random population sample. j Am. Coll Cardiol 21(5), 1220–1225 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selzer A. Changing aspects of the natural history of valvular aortic stenosis. N Engl. Med. 317(2), 91–98 (1987).
   Google Scholar
• Pellikka PA, Nishimura RA, Bailey KR, Tajik AJ. The natural history of adults with asymptomatic, hemodynamically significant aortic stenosis. j Am. Coll Canliol. 15(5), 1012–1017 (1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chizner MA, Pearle DL, DeLeon AC Jr. The natural history of aortic stenosis in adults. Am. Heart 99(4), 419–424 (1980).
   Google Scholar
• Turina J, Hess O, Sepulcri F, Krayenbuehl HP. Spontaneous course of aortic valve disease. Eur. Heart 8(5), 471–483 (1987).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faggiano P, Aurigemma GP, Rusconi C, Gaasch WH. Progression of valvular aortic stenosis in adults: literature review and clinical implications. Am. Heart' 132(2 Pt 1), 408–417 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Lung B, Gohlke-Barwolf C, Tornos P et al. Recommendations on the management of the asymptomatic patient with valvular heart disease. Eur. Hear t I 23(16), 1252–1266 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Rich MW. Epidemiology, pathophysiology and etiology of congestive heart failure in older adults. jAm. Ceriatc Soc. 45(8), 968–974 (1997).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Waller BF, Howard J, Fess S. Pathology of aortic valve stenosis and pure aortic regurgitation: a clinical morphologic assessment — part II. Clin. Cardiol 17(3), 150–156 (1994).
   Google Scholar
• Morganroth J, Perloff JK, Zeldis SM, Dunkman WB. Acute severe aortic regurgitation. Pathophysiology, clinical recognition and management. Ann. Intern Med. 87(2), 223–232 (1977).
   Google Scholar
• Rapaport E. Natural history of aortic and mitral valve disease. Am j Cardiol 35(2), 221–227 (1975).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonow RO, Lakatos E, Maron BJ, Epstein SE. Serial long-term assessment of the natural history of asymptomatic patients with chronic aortic regurgitation and normal left ventricular systolic function. Circulation 84 (4), 1625–1635 (1991).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonow RO. Aortic regurgitation. CI.117: Treat. Options Cardiovasc. Med. 2(2), 125–132 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Tornos MP, Olona M, Permanyer-Miralda G et al. Clinical outcome of severe asymptomatic chronic aortic regurgitation: a long-term prospective follow-up study. Am. Heart 130(2), 333–339 (1995).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Scognamiglio R, Fasoli G, Dalla Volta S. Progression of myocardial dysfunction in asymptomatic patients with severe aortic insufficiency. Clin. Canliol. 9(4), 151–156 (1986).
   Google Scholar
• Borer JS, Hochreiter C, Herrold EM et al. Prediction of indications for valve replacement among asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic patients with chronic aortic regurgitation and normal left ventricular performance. Circulation 97(6), 525–534 (1998).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Scognamiglio R, Rahimtoola SH, Fasoli G, Nistri S, Dalla Volta S. Nifedipine in asymptomatic patients with severe aortic regurgitation and normal left ventricular function. N. Engl. Med. 331 (11), 689–694 (1994).
   Google Scholar
• Siemienczuk D, Greenberg B, Morris C et al Chronic aortic insufficiency: factors associated with progression to aortic valve replacement. Ann. Intern. Med. 110(8), 587–592 (1989).
   Google Scholar
• Gaasch WH, Sundaram M, Meyer TE. Managing asymptomatic patients with chronic aortic regurgitation. Chest 111(6), 1702–1709 (1997).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nishimura RA, McGoon MD, Schaff HV, Giuliani ER. Chronic aortic regurgitation: indications for operation — 1988. Mayo Clin. Proc. 63(3), 270–280 (1988).
   Google Scholar
• Bonow RO. Asymptomatic aortic regurgitation: indications for operation. Card. Surg. 9 (Suppl. 2), 170–173 (1994).
   Google Scholar
• Carabello BA. The changing unnatural history of valvular regurgitation. Ann. Thorac Surg. 53(2), 191–199 (1992).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sezai A, Shiono M, Orime Y et al Evaluation of valve sound and its effects on ATS prosthetic valves in patients' quality of life. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 69(2), 507–512 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Podolec P, Pfitzner R, Wierzbicki K et al The quality of life after aortic valve replacement with homografts or prosthetic valves. 1 Heart Valve Dis. 8(3), 270–276 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Olsson M, Janfjall H, Orth-Gomer K, Unden A, Rosenqvist M. Quality of life in octogenarians after valve replacement due to aortic stenosis. A prospective comparison with younger patients. Eur. Heart J.17 (4), 583–589 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Pupello DF, Bessone LN, Lopez E et al. Long-term results of the bioprosthesis in elderly patients: impact on quality of life. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 71\(Suppl. 5), S244—S248 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• ••Uses the Short Form-36 in 1402 patientsand shows significant improvements in many categories. A well written and well performed study that provides useful clinical information using a common generic quality of life (Q01) instrument.
   Google Scholar
• Coons SJ, Rao S, Keininger DL, Hays RD. A comparative review of generic quality of life instruments. PharmacoEconomics (1), 13–35 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• •For those new to the field, this paper provides information on most of the common generic QOL instruments in common use.
   Google Scholar
• Sedrakyan A, Vaccarino V, Paltiel AD et al. Age does not limit quality of life improvement in cardiac valve surgery. Am Coll. Cardiol 42(7), 1208–1214 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Jenkinson C, Jenkinson D, Shepperd S, Layte R, Petersen S. Evaluation of treatment for congestive heart failure in patients aged 60 years and older using generic measures of health status (SF-36 and COOP charts). Age Ageing 26(1), 7–13 (1997).
   Google Scholar
• Rogers WJ, Johnstone DE, Yusuf S et al Quality of life among 5025 patients with left ventricular dysfunction randomized between placebo and enalapril: the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction. The SOLVD Investigators. jAm. Coll Canliol. 23(2), 393–400 (1994).
   Google Scholar
• Perchinsky M, Henderson C, Jamieson VVR et al Quality of life in patients with bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses. Evaluation of cohorts of patients aged 51 to 65 years at implantation. Circulation 98\(Suppl. 19), 1181–1187 (1998). A limited patient group but uses the Short Form-36, another common QOL instrument. One of the few articles attempting to directly compare QOL between recipients of bioprostheses and mechanical protheses.
   Google Scholar
• Maliwa MA, van der Heijden GJ, Bots ML et al Quality of life and NYHA class 30 years after mechanical aortic valve replacement. Cardiovasc. Surg: 11 (5), 381–387 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• •Long-term follow-up for mechanical valves and the predictive value of New York Heart Association class with outcomes.
   Google Scholar
• Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQ0L Group. Ann. Med. 33(5), 337–343 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Chocron S, Rude N, Dussaucy A et al Quality of life after open-heart surgery in patients over 75 years old. Age Ageing25(1), 8–11 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Walther T, Falk V, Metz S et al Pain and quality of life after minimally invasive versus conventional cardiac surgery. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 67(6), 1643–1647 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Bulpitt CJ. Quality of life with ACE inhibitors in chronic heart failure. j Carcliovasc. Pharmacol 27\(Suppl. 2), S31—S35 (1990.
   Google Scholar
• Berry C, McMurray J. A review of quality of life evaluations in patients with congestive heart failure. PhalmacoEconomics 16(3), 247–271 (1999).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hunt SM, McEwen J, McKenna SR Perceived health: age and sex comparisonsin a community. J. Epidemiol Corn. Health 38(2), 156–160 (1984).
   Google Scholar
• Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NM et al Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BE Med. j 305(6846), 160–164 (1992).
   Google Scholar
• Ekeberg O, Klemsdal TO, Kjeldsen SE. Quality of life on enalapril after acute myocardial infarction. Eur. Heart 15(8), 1135–1139 (1994).
   Google Scholar
• Johnson PH, Cowley AJ, Kinnear WJ. A randomized controlled trial of inspiratory muscle training in stable chronic heart failure. Eur. Heart 19 (8), 1249–1253 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Rector TS, Kubo SH, Cohn JN. Validity of the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire as a measure of therapeutic response to enalapril or placebo. Am j Carcliol 71(12), 1106–1107 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rector TS, Tschumperlin LK, Kubo SH et al Use of the Living With Heart Failure questionnaire to ascertain patients' perspectives on improvement in quality of life versus risk of drug-induced death. j Card. Fain (3), 201–206 (1995).
   Google Scholar
• Wildund I, Lindvall K, Swedberg K, Zupkis RV. Self-assessment of quality of life in severe heart failure. An instrument for clinical use. Scam/. I Psychol. 28(3), 220–225 (1987).
   Google Scholar
• •Presentation of a newly developed instrument and demonstration of its use in heart failure patients.
   Google Scholar
• Gundersen T, Wildund I, Swedberg K, Amtorp O, Remes J, Nilsson B. Effects of 12 weeks of ramipril treatment on the quality of life in patients with moderate congestive heart failure: results of a placebo-controlled trial. Ramipril Study Group. Carcliovasc. Drugs Ther. 9(4), 589–594 (1995).
   Google Scholar
• Wolinsky FD, Wyrwich KW Nienaber NA, Tierney WM. Generic versus disease-specific health status measures. An example using coronary artery disease and congestive heart failure patients. Eva'. Health Prof. 21(2), 216–243 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• ••Shows the varied role of generic versusdisease specific quality of life instruments is clearly presented. Will help guide instrument choice.
   Google Scholar
• Rich MW, Beckham V, Wittenberg C, Leven CL, Freedland KE, Carney RM. A multidisciplinary intervention to prevent the readmission of elderly patients with congestive heart failure. N Engl. J. Med. 333(18), 1190–1195 (1995).
   Google Scholar
• Guyatt GH, Sullivan MJ, Fallen EL et al A controlled trial of digoxin in congestive heart failure. Ainj Canliol 61(4), 371–375 (1988).
   Google Scholar
• Rothenburger M, Drebber K, Tjan TD et al Aortic valve replacement for aortic regurgitation and stenosis, in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction. Eur Carcliothorac. Sing. 23(5), 703–709 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Shapira OM, Kelleher RM, Zelingher J et al Prognosis and quality of life after valve surgery in patients older than 75 years. Chest 112(4), 885–894 (1997).
   Google Scholar
• Borow KM. Surgical outcome in chronic aortic regurgitation: a physiologic framework for assessing preoperative predictors. j A117. Coll. Cardiol. 10(5), 1165–1170 (1987).
   Google Scholar
• Kvidal P, Bergstrom R, Horte LG, Stable E. Observed and relative survival after aortic valve replacement. J. Am Coll. Catrliol 35(3), 747–756 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Stable E, Kvidal P, Nystrom SO, Bergstrom R. Long-term relative survival after primary heart valve replacement. Eur Catdiothorac. Sing 11(1), 81–91 (1997).
   Google Scholar
• Jamieson VVR, Edwards FH, Schwartz M, Bero JVV, Clark RE, Grover FL. Risk stratification for cardiac valve replacement. National Cardiac Surgery Database. Database Committee of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Ann. Thorac. Sing. 67(4), 943–951 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Lund O. Preoperative risk evaluation and stratification of long-term survival after valve replacement for aortic stenosis. Reasons for earlier operative intervention. Circulation 82(1), 124–139 (1990).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hwang MET, Hammermeister KE, Oprian C et al Preoperative identification of patients likely to have left ventricular dysfunction after aortic valve replacement. Participants in the Veterans Administration Co-operative Study on Valvular Heart Disease. Circulation 80(3 Pt 1), 165–76 (1989).
   Google Scholar
• Hwang MET, Burchfiel CM, Sethi GK et al Comparison of the causes of late death following aortic and mitral valve replacement. VA Co-operative Study on Valvular Heart Disease. J. Heart Valve Ds. 3(1), 17–24 (1994).
   Google Scholar
• Tarantini G, Buja P, Scognamiglio R et al Aortic valve replacement in severe aortic stenosis with left ventricular dysfunction: determinants of cardiac mortality and ventricular function recovery. Eur Catdiothorac. Sing 24(6), 879–885 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Kuwaki K, Tsukamoto M, Komatsu K, Morishita K, Sakata J, Abe T Simultaneous aortic and mitral valve replacement: predictors of adverse outcome. J. Heart Valve Dis. 12(2), 169–176 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chocron S, Etievent JP, Viel JF et al Prospective study of quality of life before and after open heart operations. Ann. Thorac. Sing. 61(1), 153–157 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Goldsmith IR, Lip GY, Patel RL. A prospective study of changes in patients' quality of life after aortic valve replacement. Heart Valve Dis. 10(3), 346–353 (2001).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ••One of few prospective studies of QOLfollowing aortal valve replacement (AVR) specifically.
   Google Scholar
• Rahimtoola SH. Choice of prosthetic heart valve for adult patients. J. Am Coll Cardiol. 19 41(6), 893–904 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Hammermeister K, Sethi GK, Henderson WG, Grover FL, Oprian C, Rahimtoola SH. Outcomes 15 years after valve replacement with a mechanical versus a bioprosthetic valve: final report of the Veterans Affairs randomized trial. Coll Cardiol 36(4), 1152–1158 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Thulin LI, Luhrs CH, Olin CL. Perception of mechanical heart valve sounds. Scand. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 23(3), 259–261 (1989).
   Google Scholar
• Blome-Eberwein SA, Mrowinski D, Hofmeister J, Hetzer R. Impact of mechanical heart valve prosthesis sound on patients' quality of life. Ann. Thorac. SLIT 61(2), 594–602 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Koertke H, Hoffmann-Koch A, Boethig D et al Does the noise of mechanical heart valve prostheses affect quality of life as measured by the SF-36 questionnaire? Eur. Camliothorac. Surg. 24(1), 52–58 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Legarra JJ, Llorens R, Catalan M et al Eighteen-year follow-up after Hancock II bioprosthesis insertion. J: Heart Valve Dis. 8(1), 16–24 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG, Leblanc MH, Cartier P, Metras J. Changes in left ventricular mass and function after aortic valve replacement: a comparison between stentless and stented bioprosthetic valves. J: Am. Soc. EchocamliogE 12 (11), 981–987 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Del Rizzo DF, Abdoh A, Cartier P, Doty D, Westaby S. The effect of prosthetic valve type on survival after aortic valve surgery. Semin. Thorac. Catrliovasc. Surg. 11(4 Suppl. 1), 1–8 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• All A, Lim E, Halstead J et al Porcine or human stentless valves for aortic valve replacement? Results of a 10-year comparative study. I Heart Valve Dis. 12(4), 430–435 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Matsuki O, Robles A, Gibbs S, Bodnar E, Ross DN. Long-term performance of 555 aortic homografts in the aortic position. Ann. Thora.c Surg. 46(2), 187–191 (1988).
   Google Scholar
• Ross DN. Replacement of aortic and mitral valves with a pulmonary autograft. Lancet 2(7523), 956–958 (1967).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elkins RC, Knott-Craig CJ, Ward KE, Lane MM. The Ross operation in children: 10-year experience. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 65(2), 496–502 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Fullerton DA, Fredericksen JW, Sundaresan RS, Horvath IKA. The Ross procedure in adults: intermediate-term results. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 76(2), 471–477 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Ross D, Jackson M, Davies J. Pulmonary autograft aortic valve replacement: long- term results. J: Card SLIT 6 (Suppl. 4), 529–533 (1991).
   Google Scholar
• Notzold A, Huppe M, Schmidtke C, Blomer P, Uhlig T, Sievers IIf I. Quality oflife in aortic valve replacement: pulmonary autografts versus mechanical prostheses. Am. Coll. Cardiol 37 (7), 1963-1966 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Corbi P, Rahmati M, Donal E et al Prospective comparison of minimally invasive and standard techniques for aortic valve replacement: initial experience in the first hundred patients. J: Card SLIT 18(2), 133–139 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• •Provides prospective outcomes information for minimally invasive AVR, although it is a small cohort.
   Google Scholar
• Sharony R, Grossi EA, Saunders PC et al Minimally invasive aortic valve surgery in the elderly: a case-control study. Circulation 108 (Suppl. 1), 1143–1147 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Sharony R, Grossi EA, Ribakove GH, Ursomanno P, Colvin SB, Galloway AC. Minimally invasive valve surgery: evolution of technique and clinical results. Adv. Camliol 39,164–172 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Cohn LH, Adams DH, Couper GS et al Minimally invasive cardiac valve surgery improves patient satisfaction while reducing costs of cardiac valve replacement and repair. Ann. &mg: 226(4), 421–428 (1997).
   Google Scholar
• Cohn LH, Adams DH, Couper GS, Bichell DR Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement. Semin. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 9(4), 331–336 (1997).
   Google Scholar
• Defter C, Deuse T, Boehm DH, Reichenspumer H, Reichart B. Midterm results and quality of life after minimally invasive versus conventional aortic valve replacement. Thorac. Camliovasc. &mg: 50(6), 337–341 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Olsson M, Granstrom L, Lindblom D, Rosenqvist M, Ryden L. Aortic valve replacement in octogenarians with aortic stenosis: a case-control study. J: Am. Coll Camliol 20(7), 1512–1516 (1992).
   Google Scholar
• Levin IL, Olivecrona GK, Thulin LI, Olsson SB. Aortic valve replacement in patients older than 85 years: outcomes and the effect on their quality of life. Coron. Artery Dis. 9(6), 373–380 (1998"
   Google Scholar
• Tseng EE, Lee CA, Cameron DE et al Aortic valve replacement in the elderly. Risk factors and long-term results. Ann. Surg. 225(6), 793–802 (1997).
   Google Scholar
• Ruygrok PN, Barratt-Boyes BG, Agnew TM, Coverdale HA, Kerr AR, Whitlock RM. Aortic valve replacement in the elderly.j Heart Valve Dis. 2(5), 550–557 (1993).
   Google Scholar
• Williams T Geriatrics: a perspective on quality of life and care for older people. In: Quality of Life Assaismenis in Clinical Pia's. Spilker B (Ed.). Raven Press Ltd, NY, USA (1990).
   Google Scholar
• Bramstedt KA. Aortic valve replacement in the elderly: frequently indicated yet frequently denied. Cerontology49 (1), 46–49 (2003).
   Google Scholar