A
Andyrdj
This thread was motivated by this post I found on the web, dated February 19, 2007:
http://engineers.ihs.com/news/frost-heart-valve.htm
duplicated here->http://www.healthservicetalk.com/news/fro/fro128.html
to quote
Improved manufacturing techniques and materials have enhanced the durability of tissue-based heart valves - extending them 20 years longer, far exceeding the performance of previous generations.
Now, givwn that they haven't been in people's bodies for long enough to make that assessment, I'm assuming that this is based on Laboratory simulations. We've occasionally hear stuff on the grapevine suggesting that the newer tissue valves are expected to last far longer, only people aren't allowed to say it publicly (presumably because this is based on lab data, not real life data)
Now, I know no lab test is, but I realised reading this that we have no posts on VR.com that tell us how good lab test actually are!
read this abstract from 1998 - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9587854&dopt=Abstract
- it gives us some idea at least. They seemed confident at the time that they could reproduce real life effects.
Now, I would like to see if anyone can find lab data for some of the newer valves - e.g. C/E magna, mosaic, ON-X - and reveal to us the testing that's been done on areas such as durability, calcification, and coagulation
(by the way, for coagulation tests, read this one! http://www.nsf.gov/discoveries/disc_summ.jsp?cntn_id=103066&org=NSF).
There will be some willing to take the plunge on a totally new valve, others who are perhaps interested in one with 5-10 years favourable testing in real life patients, but who wonder what's likely to happen after that.
Well, with the lab data to show us, taken with the appropriate pinch of salt, we surely have more chance of making an informed choice.
For example, I personally would love to see some results with a state of the art testing device used on a second generation valve and a third generation valve for comparison.
http://engineers.ihs.com/news/frost-heart-valve.htm
duplicated here->http://www.healthservicetalk.com/news/fro/fro128.html
to quote
Improved manufacturing techniques and materials have enhanced the durability of tissue-based heart valves - extending them 20 years longer, far exceeding the performance of previous generations.
Now, givwn that they haven't been in people's bodies for long enough to make that assessment, I'm assuming that this is based on Laboratory simulations. We've occasionally hear stuff on the grapevine suggesting that the newer tissue valves are expected to last far longer, only people aren't allowed to say it publicly (presumably because this is based on lab data, not real life data)
Now, I know no lab test is, but I realised reading this that we have no posts on VR.com that tell us how good lab test actually are!
read this abstract from 1998 - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9587854&dopt=Abstract
- it gives us some idea at least. They seemed confident at the time that they could reproduce real life effects.
Now, I would like to see if anyone can find lab data for some of the newer valves - e.g. C/E magna, mosaic, ON-X - and reveal to us the testing that's been done on areas such as durability, calcification, and coagulation
(by the way, for coagulation tests, read this one! http://www.nsf.gov/discoveries/disc_summ.jsp?cntn_id=103066&org=NSF).
There will be some willing to take the plunge on a totally new valve, others who are perhaps interested in one with 5-10 years favourable testing in real life patients, but who wonder what's likely to happen after that.
Well, with the lab data to show us, taken with the appropriate pinch of salt, we surely have more chance of making an informed choice.
For example, I personally would love to see some results with a state of the art testing device used on a second generation valve and a third generation valve for comparison.
