Avatar universal

aortic stenosis

I am an 82 year old male with aortic stenosis (the valve remains open),a mitral valve problem, and congestive heart failure who has had a triple bypass and several stents. Is an aortic valve replacement a viable option for me?
2 Responses
Sort by: Helpful Oldest Newest
592969 tn?1248325405
How bad is your aortic valve?  How out of breath are you?  This is a big surgery.  Valve replacement is very complex.  This surgery has a much more recovery time than a bypass surgery.  There is risk involved.  Sometimes valves get better, so do not rush into surgery unless you very much need it.  
Helpful - 0
367994 tn?1304953593
Minimum invasive surgery for aortic valve repacement.  It is 6-10 cm in length and through a smaller incision allows the surgeon to open the upper part of the sternum only, which gives free access to the ascending aorta as it arises from the heart and hence the aortic valve.

Advantages of this incision are a more cosmetic result, faster healing, less blood loss and need for transfusion, and potentially shorter hospital stay. It is an option for almost anyone receiving isolated aortic valve replacement. Note that coronary artery bypass grafting can not be accomplished with minimally invasive incision options. It is an excellent option for someone who has had previous coronary artery bypass grafting and has an open internal mammary artery graft!!!!?

Surgery is usually not performed (fuill sternotomy) if one is in heart failure mode (EF below 29%)...too rsiky unless it is life your death situation.

Contrary to what the other poster stated, valve disorders do not improve.  An exception is ischemiac left ventrical enlargement.  The enlargement deforms the valve opening, and sometimes when the heart has reversed remodeling (size returns to normal) and MVR is correected. There was some expectation my mitral valve regurg could be corrected.  My left ventricle has returned to normal size, but MVR remains unabated!

A major valve sugeon at the Mayo Clinic commented too many people wait too long before deciding on surgery.  The porblem is if one waits too long there is a danger that left wentricle systole cannot be preserved...your systole function is already impaired as evidence by CHF, by a minimum invasion treatment may be beneficial.  That would be a decision of a surgeon to weigh the benefit vs. risk.  

Helpful - 0
Have an Answer?

You are reading content posted in the Heart Disease Community

Top Heart Disease Answerers
159619 tn?1538180937
Salt Lake City, UT
11548417 tn?1506080564
Learn About Top Answerers
Didn't find the answer you were looking for?
Ask a question
Popular Resources
Is a low-fat diet really that heart healthy after all? James D. Nicolantonio, PharmD, urges us to reconsider decades-long dietary guidelines.
Can depression and anxiety cause heart disease? Get the facts in this Missouri Medicine report.
Fish oil, folic acid, vitamin C. Find out if these supplements are heart-healthy or overhyped.
Learn what happens before, during and after a heart attack occurs.
What are the pros and cons of taking fish oil for heart health? Find out in this article from Missouri Medicine.
How to lower your heart attack risk.