Skip to main content
. 2019 Mar;112(3):292–301. doi: 10.5935/abc.20180272

Table 1.

Characteristics of included studies

Trials Year of
publication
Total
randomised
Type of
valves
Number
Randomised
Patients Characteristics Local of prosthesis
implantation
Follow-up (m/y)
Vallejo 1981 110 Bioprosthesis:
Angell-Shiley
38 7% NYHA II; 27% NYHA III; 4%
NYHA IV
66% Male, Mean age: 39.7 ± 11 .2
MVR Mean
24.13 ±11.16 m
Mechanical
prosthesis *:
Bjork-Shiley
35 7% NYHA II; 24% NYHA III;
4% NYHA IV
69% Male, 40.7 ± 11.3
MVR Mean
31.61 ± 13.02 m
Lillehei-Kaster 37 4% NYHA II; 30% NYHA III;
3% NYHA IV
76% Male, 41.9 ± 10.4
MVR Mean
30.4 ± 15.9 m
Veterans Affairs
(Hammermeister)
2000 575 Bioprosthesis:
Hancock
porcine
289 100% Male 67% AVR;
33% MVR
Maximum 18 y
Mechanical
prosthesis:
Bjork-Shiley
286 100% Male 69% AVR;
31% MVR
Maximum 18 y
Edinburgh
(Oxenham,
Bloomfield)
2003 533 Bioprosthesis:
Hancock
porcine
Carpentier-
Edwards
107
159
53% NYHA III or IV AF
76% Female mitral valve
38% AVR,
50% MVR,
12% AVR+MVR
Mean
20.4 y
Mechanical
prosthesis:
Bjork-Shiley
267 57% NYHA III or IV
74% Female mitral valve
41% AVR,
48% MVR,
11% AVR+MVR
Mean
20.4 y
Stassano 2009 310 Bioprosthesis:
Carpentier-
Edwards SAV
93 75.5% NYHA III or IV
Male 50.3%
Age 63.5 ± 3.9
100% AVR Mean 106 ± 28 m
Carpentier-
Edwards
Pericardial
62
Mechanical
prosthesis: St.
Jude Medical
107 76,8% NYHA III or IV
Male 42,5%
Age 64.0 ± 7.6
Carbomedics 48
*

Tilting disc valve. 37.8% previous surgery in mitral valve with LK (p < 0.005);

67% Bioprosthesis in atrial fibrillation.