Re-operation only three years later

[RonnyTemple]

Hey all. In 2009, at the age of 51, I had a congenitally defective aortic valve replaced with a tissue valve.

Six months ago I noticed my stamina and energy taking a dive. An echo confirmed stiffening of the valve leaves and a change in flow but not enough to do anything about. In the last 30 days its gotten so any physical exertion greater than just walking slowly on a level sidewalk leaves me heaving for breath. I am scheduled for another echo next week and the strong possibility of a re-op very soon. No one seems to know why the valve seems to be failing.

I'd be interested in hearing from anyone that has had a similar experience, or who knows why tissue valves sometimes fail so quickly, or who have had AVR via minimally invasive procedure (I didn't enjoy the split sternum the first time.)

Thanks.

Blessings

Ronny Temple

 

[tom in MO]

There is someone else who recently needed a re-op on year two. They have posted within the last two months.

There is supposition in the medical community as to why tissue valves fail more quickly in the young than old or in some individuals. What I've read was not definitive as to exact reasons or any treatment. There is no method of predicting valve life in advance or medication, diet, etc. to keep the valve from failing other than good diet and exercise.

Best of luck with your upcoming adventures. If you are having sypmtoms, keep pushing for treatment.

My prayers are with you.

 

[spartangator]

Hi Ronny,
I can't add anything to your questions, but I just wanted to say I'm sorry you're dealing with this again so soon. As Tom points out, there are lots of unanswered questions about this stuff. I hope you get some relief soon.

 

[Guyswell]

My tissue valve that I received at age 41 failed after 8 years. We don't know why it calcified so quickly and can only conclude that it had something to do with my specific metabolism. I wonder if your problems are due to calcification, tissue in-growth (pannus), or vegetation. Your cardiologist may suggest a TEE (transesophageal echocardiogram) for a better view of what's going on. If you need to have a second operation or need to switch to a mechanical valve, don't despair. I've done both and it worked out just fine.

 

[Protimenow]

I also can't theorize about why your valve failed so soon. It may be possible that your valve can be 'repaired' without cracking your sternum.

However, at 51, I'm a bit surprised that a tissue valve was seen as a viable option. Unless you had other serious medical issues and didn't expect to live past 60 or so, this was probably not the best choice.

I've had my mechanical valve since I was 41. Even if I was in my 50s when the awful decision had to be made, I probably would have gone for mechanical.

Taking warfarin for the rest of my life wasn't that daunting an issue. For you, if you must go under the knife again, don't let fear of anticoagulation therapy influence your decision on a new valve. (I test my blood, at home, every 7-10 days. It's not that big a deal to keep the INR in range. If YOU go mechanical, and need to take warfarin, it shouldn't be that big a deal. Plus, lots of research is being done for warfarin replacements, so at some time in your lifetime, there may be an even easier, possibly even safer, way to prevent clots than warfarin).

 

[Gail in Ca]

Sorry your valve didn't go the distance.
When I questioned my cardio about tissue valves, he said he was bothered by two recent patients whose tissue valve lasted less than 4 yrs.
He didn't have an answer as to why their valves went south too soon, one with little holes and the other with a tear.