Jinko Zoki
Online ISSN : 1883-6097
Print ISSN : 0300-0818
ISSN-L : 0300-0818
Mechanical valve versus bioprosthesis-Clinical and hemodynamic evaluation
S. NAKONOH. HIROSEH. MATSUDAS. SATOT. SAKAKIBARAT. HOTTAS. OHTAKEY. KAWASHIMA
Author information
JOURNAL FREE ACCESS

1984 Volume 13 Issue 1 Pages 16-19

Details
Abstract

We evaluated clinical and hemodynamic results in the patients undergoing AVR with Bjork-Shiley prosthesis and - propiolactone preserved aortic homocaraft, and MVR with Hancock valve, aortic homogaft, and dura mater valve. We concluded that mechanical valve was the prosthesis of choice in aortic as well as in mitral position.

Content from these authors
© The Japanese Society for Artificial Organs
Previous article Next article
feedback
Top