What about the other heart valves?

[Jkm7]

Most of the thread titles and conversations exclude any mention of other heart valves but aortic.

Some of us here have had open heart surgery(ies)/valve replacements of other valves.
Every now and then, it's good for us to mention we have other valvers here.

I am a mitral valver and went through two surgeries.
I feel better now....... Got that off my chest. Stress isn't good for us.

 

[chaconne]

jkm7,

Thanks for bringing up that point. I wonder what % of total valve replacements are for the Aortic. I suspect it's high (80-90%) which is why you don't get as many posts about it. I for one am interested in knowing more about the issues with other valves. How long does a mitral tissue valve last? pulmonary? Trucusped? I haven't heard anyone mention a tricusped valve being replaced.

 

[pellicle]

Hi

Most of the thread titles and conversations exclude any mention of other heart valves but aortic.

As chaconne mentions, the majority of valve surgery is on the aortic. Also this valve takes the greatest pressures and so imperfections in this valve have greater effects on health.

I feel better now....... Got that off my chest. Stress isn't good for us.

Exactly

 

[AZ Don]

I start threads about things that are relevant to my specific situation and I comment on threads where my experience is relevant. I expect that is what most do and so the discussions focus on the more common issues. This is a valve replacement forum and I have not had ANY valve replaced and I hope I never have to, but I have always felt welcome here. Each of us has our own unique issues but we all have a lot in common as well: finding Dr's, hospitals, interpreting echo's, sternectomy, recovery, exercise, etc. If you look through the extended history I'm sure you will find many discussions relevant to mitral valves and you are always welcome to start a new discussion. I'm sure there will be someone with something relevant to say.

 

[ejc61]

I swear I've read this before about 2 months ago. Yet it's current.

 

[kfay]

The most replaced valve is obviously the aortic, followed by the mitral, pulmonary, and finally tricuspid.

I've had my tricuspid valve replaced with a porcine valve.

 

[ElectLive]

Every now and then, it's good for us to mention we have other valvers here.

Great point...and not just because it would be more neighborly :smile2: but because many of the more important issues discussed are either slightly or significantly different depending on which heart valve it is. Things such as INR ranges, valve longevity, operative risk and risk of complications, status of new technologies (transcatheter), etc...

 

[Jkm7]

Hi

As chaconne mentions, the majority of valve surgery is on the aortic. Also this valve takes the greatest pressures and so imperfections in this valve have greater effects on health.






Exactly

Oh, okay. :rolleyes2: No big deal about my two OHS...... only mitral valve involved.
Good to know it's not a risk to my health because its mitral. Not to mention added risk of stroke seeing most doctors set a higher INR range for mechanical mitral valves.


That is the sort of comment which prompted me to start this thread.

 

[Jkm7]

I start threads about things that are relevant to my specific situation and I comment on threads where my experience is relevant. I expect that is what most do and so the discussions focus on the more common issues. This is a valve replacement forum and I have not had ANY valve replaced and I hope I never have to, but I have always felt welcome here. Each of us has our own unique issues but we all have a lot in common as well: finding Dr's, hospitals, interpreting echo's, sternectomy, recovery, exercise, etc. If you look through the extended history I'm sure you will find many discussions relevant to mitral valves and you are always welcome to start a new discussion. I'm sure there will be someone with something relevant to say.

Thanks.
I've been here since 2005....... that pesky mitral valve of mine has kept me hanging around a 'valve replacement' forum.

 

[pellicle]

Oh, okay. :rolleyes2: No big deal about my two OHS...... only mitral valve involved.
Good to know it's not a risk to our health.
No risk to my health because of that valve. Not to mention added risk of stroke seeing most doctors set a higher INR range for mechanical mitral valves.

That is the sort of comment which prompted me to start this thread.

I'm sorry you decided to take my comments that way. I suppose that I have to layer everything in sugar coating to make sure that all who are anxious and sensitive are not ruffled.

My intention was to simply answer the question which was asked ... it was an attempt to explain it with a simple aspect of statistics. You seem to take great joy out of turning anything that I say in a plain way as some sort of jab at you personally.

I am sorry for this but you can not blame me for that.

as I said:

the majority of valve surgery is on the aortic. Also this valve takes the greatest pressures and so imperfections in this valve have greater effects on health.

that is a simple statement, it is your choice to have turned that as me saying that your condition was inferior or superior.

why do you always choose to attack me?

PS: clearly no big deal about my OHS's or infections, or whatever ... you only see yourself as important and anyone who you don't happen to like the sound of as an enemy. This is not the first time you have chosen to twist my words to your own end.

PPS: if you actually *read* my post you'll find I was supporting you ... that will cease from now on.

 

[Gail in Ca]

Oh, Tsk Tsk, you two!!!
Many of us have had more than one valve replaced/repaired. My mitral was watched for years, and when it got affected by endocarditis, it was leaking severely.
I had symptoms for many years, but didn't know it was the mitral causing them, until it was repaired 4 years ago along with a new aortic mechanical. I think many of us get them repaired if possible, now.
As far as cath replacement, my cardio just told me that method is just for aortic right now, not mitral.
My surgeon would've gone thru the rib on my mitral if I hadn't needed to have my aortic done due to the endocarditis, as well.
It seems also that he really wanted to repair it, so my INR range could be lower. (My subarachnoid hemorrhage bothered him).
I really felt that having the mitral fixed was just as good as having an aortic valve done. My symptoms are gone. That makes a huge life difference.

 

[tom in MO]

Mitrals are often fixed. Maybe this should be the valve replacement and repair forum

 

[epstns]

Thinking back to when I first became active here, Tom, mitral repairs were not ac commonplace then as they are now. I would guess that has to do with improving techniques and greater numbers of surgeons becoming proficient in them. I'm glad to see this progress, as a successful repair is probably a better long-term solution than any prosthetic valve.

 

[Ruth]

Very true, if you want to feel alone on this forum try being a mitral valver with a repair.... lol.

Seriously, though, I think some of us "mitrals" have a lot in common with regard to oddball heartbeats, potentially slower recoveries, and other "mitralesque" qualities (how's that for a new word...). I have found myself envious of how quickly it seems many "aortics" recover after surgery, though I do not envy their aortic root graphs/risks/challenges. As to "imperfections in the aortic valve having a greater effect on health", that's just a bunch of hooey, imperfections in ANY valve has a great effect on health. SMH

We all have so very much in common and to be happy and thankful for, talented surgeons and their techniques, and of course, each other. But, yes, I do feel a bit outnumbered every now and again but that's just the way the numbers play out I suppose.

For example, I would love to hear from other mitral repair folk how long a repair lasts? Darned if I know. Has anyone here had a mitral repair redone? Mine is in its 7'th year. What a long, strange trip its been...

Best to all....

 

[ElectLive]

For example, I would love to hear from other mitral repair folk how long a repair lasts? Darned if I know.

The Cleveland Clinic is known to be the best in the world for mitral valve repair experience, and they periodically have webchats (archived on their site) discussing longevity and other aspects, particularly those of Dr. Gillinov (who seems to be most well known for doing aortic replacement on Robin Williams, although a mitral repair - his specialty - was done too...ironically enough!) You know, interestingly, I've heard nothing but bovine valve (aortic) jokes from Robin Williams ever since too...so he's certainly not doing his part to raise mitral awareness! :rolleyes2:

But anyway, back to your question :thumbup: : Cleveland speaks to very good 20 year results (and beyond)...80% to 90% still have good function at the 20 year mark.

 

[Jkm7]

<snip>

But anyway, back to your question :thumbup: : Cleveland speaks to very good 20 year results (and beyond)...80% to 90% still have good function at the 20 year mark.

This is really interesting as all my doctors have expressed an opinion my mitral bovine valve might/could/maybe will serve me about 20+ years. Seeing it's the newer generation and no one has had them that long, they only can estimate predicated upon the generation of bovine mitrals that preceeded this newer one. It is my understanding in patients 60+ years, the older generation mitral bovine valves sometimes/often (?) lasted 20 years so they expect the improvements should provide longer usefulness.

My excellent Mass General surgeon worked hard to try and repair my valve, in the end he replaced it as we had agreed. I never really was eager for the repair as I feared a failed repair. I had read of too many failed repairs and agreed a bit hesitantly to have him try for the repair. When I awoke and he told me of the replacement, deep down I was relieved.

This, too, is such a personal choice and we all have to make that decision for ourselves. What feels right to me may not feel right to someone else.

 

[ElectLive]

Yes, the results in the 60+ age group for older generation mitral replacement valves (bovine) are also very good...I think in the neighborhood of 90% freedom from explant (due to structural valve deterioration) for the Edwards Perimount Mitral around the 15 year mark (which was the endpoint of that particular study) as one example.

 

[gerrychuck]

As to "imperfections in the aortic valve having a greater effect on health", that's just a bunch of hooey, imperfections in ANY valve has a great effect on health. SMH

Couldn't agree more! My mitral valve failed quite spectacularly (and without warning) and came within a couple of hours of killing me before I was correctly diagnosed and rushed into surgery. I do consider near-death to be a fairly significant "effect on health"

 

[Agian]

A cardiothoracic nurse told me that patients who go into surgery for mitral valve are usually sicker than their aortic counterparts.

 

[pellicle]

Hi

My mitral valve failed quite spectacularly (and without warning) and came within a couple of hours of killing me before I was correctly diagnosed and rushed into surgery.

well I guess this is what I was trying to say above. That because the aortic is on the higher pressure side of things that defects there often become more observable before the lower pressure side.

For example I have a collapsed vein (see post) which is such that were it an artery I understood that there would be more significant issues. So I was assuming that on the veinus side more so than the arterial side valve defects may go more unnoticed. But I was just basing this on my discussions in waiting rooms with other patients.

I was not trying to say that anything to do with the heart is non critical or to make any sort of ranking of who is more special or important.

Unlike much of the body if anything goes wrong with the heart its pretty much always a big issue.