Share this page on LinkedIn
Share This Page on Google+
Share This Page on Twitter
tell someone about this page print this page
You are here: Contents > 2006 > Volume 15 Number 3 May 2006 > DEVICE EVALUATION > A Prospective Randomized Comparison of Medtronic Mosaic and Carpentier-Edwards-SAV in the Aortic Position: An Interim Report

A Prospective Randomized Comparison of Medtronic Mosaic and Carpentier-Edwards-SAV in the Aortic Position: An Interim Report

Anil John, Zamir Khan, James Kuo, Simon M. Allen, Adrian J. Marchbank, Malcolm J. R. Dalrymple-Hay, 

C. Terence Lewis, Gina Twine, Maxine Edwards, Jonathan Unsworth-White
Southwest Cardiothoracic Centre, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth,
United Kingdom

Background and aim of the study: The study aim was to compare prospectively the clinical performance and long-term durability of the Medtronic Mosaic and Carpentier-Edwards porcine (CE-SAV) bioprostheses in the aortic position over 10 years.
Methods: Between January 2001 and July 2003, a total of 242 patients undergoing
bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (AVR) were prospectively randomized to receive either Medtronic Mosaic (n = 126) or CE-SAV (n = 116) valves, and followed up annually.
Results: The mean follow up period was 1.7 ± 0.8 years; total follow up was 411 patient-years. Early mortality and 40-month actuarial survival were 5.5% and 93 ± 1% for the Mosaic valve, and 2.6% and 90 ±


1% for the CE-SAV. Among patients, 78% showed symptomatic improvement in their NYHA functional class after AVR. To date there have been no structural failures, and one patient required reoperation for prosthetic valve (Mosaic) endocarditis. Early thromboembolic events occurred in 2.9% of patients (two Mosaic, five CE-SAV). Echocardiographic evaluations between the two valves demonstrated comparable hemodynamic performance for a given size at one year after surgery.
Conclusion: At this stage of the study there were no differences in clinical or hemodynamic outcome in patients undergoing AVR using either the Mosaic or CE-SAV porcine xenograft.
The Journal of Heart Valve Disease 2006;15:441-445

A Prospective Randomized Comparison of Medtronic Mosaic and Carpentier-Edwards-SAV in the Aortic Position: An Interim Report

Click the above hyperlink to view the article, right click (Ctrl click on a Mac) to open in a new browser window or tab.

Purchase this Article

Please click the button below to purchase this article. Single article purchases are provided at $50.00 per article. Upon clicking the button below, single article user account subscription details are requested and, upon successful payment, a single article user account is created. Single articles are availble in your account for seven days after purchase.