cuoricino
www.thoughtsfromabroad.com
Hi all, I've been reading up on the different types of valves and their pros and cons. Even though it is somewhat discouraged in patients my age because of the short life expectancy of the valve, I'm leaning towards a tissue valve and considering the Ross procedure (granted I can get my hands on a good surgeon here in Italy).
Am I crazy to want a tissue valve when it most certainly means a do-over surgery (or maybe even 2 do-overs) in the future? I want to avoid coumadin because I want to have children. And I was thinking that I could do tissue valve, and when that one poops out, put a mechanical one in there and hopefully never have to re-operate. That still means 45 years of coumadin if the tissue valve gets replaced when I'm 35, if I live until the age of 80. That seems like a LONG time to be tied to medication. I know the Ross procedure has much higher success rates as far as valve longevitiy, but I'm terrified of completely ripping up my heart for a lousy aortic valve.
I have an aneurysm in my ascending aorta at 4.9cm (measured May 6, 2009)and that's why they want to operate. Until now, the cardios and surgeons I have met with have taken for granted replacing the valve and repairing the aneurysm altogether. But wouldn't it make more sense to save my valve (especially since I'm so young) until it's absolutely necessary?
I've read the sticky's in this part of the forum and they've been helpful, but talk mainly about middle-aged patients. What about a 25 year old?
Thanks for any help!!
Am I crazy to want a tissue valve when it most certainly means a do-over surgery (or maybe even 2 do-overs) in the future? I want to avoid coumadin because I want to have children. And I was thinking that I could do tissue valve, and when that one poops out, put a mechanical one in there and hopefully never have to re-operate. That still means 45 years of coumadin if the tissue valve gets replaced when I'm 35, if I live until the age of 80. That seems like a LONG time to be tied to medication. I know the Ross procedure has much higher success rates as far as valve longevitiy, but I'm terrified of completely ripping up my heart for a lousy aortic valve.
I have an aneurysm in my ascending aorta at 4.9cm (measured May 6, 2009)and that's why they want to operate. Until now, the cardios and surgeons I have met with have taken for granted replacing the valve and repairing the aneurysm altogether. But wouldn't it make more sense to save my valve (especially since I'm so young) until it's absolutely necessary?
I've read the sticky's in this part of the forum and they've been helpful, but talk mainly about middle-aged patients. What about a 25 year old?
Thanks for any help!!