49.5 Year Old with Aortic Regurgitation deciding on a valve and hospital

Valve Replacement Forums

Help Support Valve Replacement Forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Mr Red

I had a Severe bicupsid aortic stenosis when I was born although I was a very active and healthy kid. I had a repair that drop my stenosis from severe to mild (60 to 11) over a period of couple years which was exceptional. If I did not have my aneursym my surgeon and cardiologist would have estimated my repair to have worked for 30 to 35 years with minimal damage to the heart (ventriculation dilation). So If I were you, I would opt for a repair cause it could last your liftetime and it is minimal. As for the second option, considering your age you might be eligible for a TAVR after your tissue valve collapses so long as they can fit a big enough valve from what I heard. However Pellicle did show some interesting studies on surviving rate of people beyond 50 with a mechanical valve : long term survival did seem higher. Good luck with your choice
 
M Red, I had aortic stenosis and like you did hundreds and hundreds of hours of research. I watched the OHS twice on line. This forum is what helped me get through it all. I chose the On-x valve because it required minimal warfarin. I had my OHS in May of 2013 at the age of 53. Almost 3 years later, I can tell you I made the right decision. I do hear ticking mainly when I lay on my left side, but I figure that means I am still alive. I test my INR weekly. I am not like many on this forum as the warfarin acts differently with my body as that I need less, not more than do others. I walk 5 miles a day and bike frequently. Usually a person needs more warfarin with more activity, but not I. I just take 2.5 mg per day.

You have to decide what is best for you. I find, for myself, that not having another surgery is preferable to doing it all again. I do get bruises more frequently, but small price to pay for being alive I think.

Life is good and I look forward to having a long life with my On-x valve. Hope it keeps "ticking" well into my 80's. Good luck and prayers for you making these hard decisions.
 
kimcdougc;n862885 said:
M Red, I had aortic stenosis and like you did hundreds and hundreds of hours of research. I watched the OHS twice on line. This forum is what helped me get through it all. I chose the On-x valve because it required minimal warfarin. I had my OHS in May of 2013 at the age of 53. Almost 3 years later, I can tell you I made the right decision. I do hear ticking mainly when I lay on my left side, but I figure that means I am still alive. I test my INR weekly. I am not like many on this forum as the warfarin acts differently with my body as that I need less, not more than do others. I walk 5 miles a day and bike frequently. Usually a person needs more warfarin with more activity, but not I. I just take 2.5 mg per day.

You have to decide what is best for you. I find, for myself, that not having another surgery is preferable to doing it all again. I do get bruises more frequently, but small price to pay for being alive I think.

Life is good and I look forward to having a long life with my On-x valve. Hope it keeps "ticking" well into my 80's. Good luck and prayers for you making these hard decisions.


Thank you kimcdougc. I've done all the work I can do. Now I'm handing control over to the doc and his team. He said, his major goal for me was to leave the operating room with trace to zero aortic insufficiency. That will be either through a repair, if that works, or a biovalve - the Magna Ease. A repair could last a lifetime. Or, if I get the Magna, I can follow it up with a TAVR when it fails in 12-20 years. If I was going to do a mechanical valve, I would have chosen the OnX.

Best to you and all the other posters. knock on wood...I'll post when I get to the other side.
 
pellicle;n862074 said:
Hi



something like that ... although pretty much all the pyrolytic carbon bileaflet valves (St Jude, ATS/Medtronics ) have similar profiles. All are good and if a history of performance rather than just "sleek design" is important to you then the StJude has a long history of success behind it.



indeed ... but I wonder if its because you were thinking tissue prosthesis and the more you learn about mechanical the less problematic they seem? Well a similar report can be found at this URL

http://mayo.img.entriq.net/htm/MayoP...articleID=4071

It opens fine in Firefox but some people have reported problems in Chrome on a tablet (like an iPad).

I've also got a blog post where I outline what I see the major points as being
http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2014/01...r-choices.html




Its an intersting point and when first starting out I can see the allure. However my question to you is : does a small drop in range make any difference? I normally manage myself (because I'm that sort of person) and my INR is typically 2.6 My surgeon had suggested to me a range of 2.2 ~ 3 and yet the guidelines are (variously 2~3 or target=2.5

He is of the view that lower INR is correlated to Pannus growth (pretty much the major significant threat to a mechanical valve function). I've not found much research, but surgeons often form opinions on their own experience / conferences and other "unpublished" works. So who knows, maybe 30 years in the field gives them some advantages?




it doesn't quite work like that. The actual risks of bleeding are a function of two things: age and INR. The graph below (from an extensive research paper) shows the reported incidents of problems (clots with INR too low, bleeds too high)

14626794599_c646b1872d_b.jpg


the data shows that you really need to push the threshold of 3 before you see an increase in bleeds

There are other studies (GELIA for instance) showing that all the bileaflet pyrolytic carbon valves are probably conservatively "anti-coagulated" and all (not just On-X) could be safely dropped to a min of 1.7 without problem.

Does this mean a revision of dose? I don't feel that it does. What it means to me is that you can take a consistent dose (which you can determine over time what that is) that sometimes dips you below 2 and sometimes rises you towards 3 without concern to you or your INR manager (and such squiggle in INR is normal).

This also makes life easier for your INR manager (and if you aren't dippy, unreliable, mentally incompetent or senile) then I would argue that that INR manager should be you. Many people (mainly outside of the USA) manage their INR successfully. I'm one who does it not only successfully but does my best to share how and encourage and assist those who do.

I had a dental clean a few weeks back and my dentist always remarks how little I bleed for a fellow on Warfarin. I put this down to effective INR management and that many many many people at clinics have an INR seesaw that they know nothing about (due to poor management).

Some tips on my blog:
http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com.au/2014...ng-my-inr.html





well I'm inclined to think that number is a little high, but the causes are varied, with Atrial Fib being one ... other causes are more difficult to "pin down"
So, although I might be leaning to the On-x valve I am still undecided. My surgery date is March 1 so I still have a bit of time.



well I didn't "pick" my valve, I got it. My last OHS was my 3rd. I'd had one when I was a kid (to "repair" the valve) another at 28 to put in a homograft, and the last one at 48 to put in a mechanical. I got an ATS and an aortic graft (due to aneurysm). We (surgeon and I) agreed (he told me, I agreed) that a 4th operation would not be at all desirable and that a mechanical gave me the best chance of a long and fruitful life. With a wife and plans for a future I wanted to minimise shocking them and maximise being a good healthy husband for my wife.


Best Wishes
Thanks for your detail, it helps understand the implications for warfarin. I had my valve replaced 3/1/2016 and now have an aortic St Jude Regent valve. I ended up with a mechanical valve due to limited space issues. This is a low profile and fit my situation. Although I was anticipating a tissue valve going in I am VERY happy to have a mechanical valve. I really prefer not to have another surgery. All is going well and after 6 weeks and am doing a good deal of walking and feeling great.
 
Hi

and thanks for your follow up ... its always good to hear from people post surgery too
marvsehn;n864618 said:
Thanks for your detail, it helps understand the implications for warfarin. I had my valve replaced 3/1/2016 and now have an aortic St Jude Regent valve. I ended up with a mechanical valve due to limited space issues. This is a low profile and fit my situation. Although I was anticipating a tissue valve going in I am VERY happy to have a mechanical valve. I really prefer not to have another surgery. All is going well and after 6 weeks and am doing a good deal of walking and feeling great.

feel free to ask any questions about INR management when you feel up to it :)
 
Back
Top