Just curious because it seems to me that the majority of the threads I have read on valvereplacement.org, ARV candidates have chosen ON-X. Even though I really value the advice and experience of patients, I want to be as open as I possibly can to making the right informed choice for me as I possibly can. BTW, I posted in this forum instead of valve selection forum because I'm assuming most of you have already decided versus those that are still considering their options.
How many of you chose your valve type based on what others on here went with?
- Thread starter canon4me
- Start date
Help Support Valve Replacement Forums:
JimL
Well-known member
I took a St. Jude mechanical because that's what my surgeon recommended some eleven years ago. I knew nothing ahead of time, that is, had no time to research in advance of the surgery, but I haven't regretted the surgeon's choice.
I too was inclined to on-x valve as everyone who visits this site will be tempted to but did not get one in the end. I am in UK and its usually hospital stock that matters. I spent a lot of my pre surgery time to find out about on-x. It was interesting to know that In UK the on-x is not so common as in US. I personally introduced 3-4 cardiologist in UK to a brand called on-x. My surgeon was insisting that all top mechanical valves are equal I should not select one based on what I read on internet. He hadn't done on-x before. He wasn't against it but he said there isn't enough magic to it as i was claiming it to have. He did try to procure it for me but it did not materialise in the end. On-x people were very helpful.
My surgeons reasoning was that it was too risky for a company to put a patient in low warfarin level. If an adverse event occurs the patient may sue the company and hence there may be too many caveats and conditions even if their trials are successful for lower anti coagulation.
I would sincerely wish on-x becomes successful on low warfarin trials so that next generation valves based on on-x can completely eliminate warfarin and any need for anti coagulation.
Also remember that an adverse event can occur for any valve and has happened as well and hence certain things are not in our control. Select a good hospital , a good surgeon and place your trust on him. More importantly dont waste your pre surgery time stressing too much as I did.
I spoke to another surgeon in UK who uses on-x valve and he too did not push for a specific brand of valve.
When I spoke to a on-x sales rep, one of the things he mentioned was that "surgeon is more important than a make of a valve" for which I respect him a lot.
Good luck and try to be stress free
My surgeons reasoning was that it was too risky for a company to put a patient in low warfarin level. If an adverse event occurs the patient may sue the company and hence there may be too many caveats and conditions even if their trials are successful for lower anti coagulation.
I would sincerely wish on-x becomes successful on low warfarin trials so that next generation valves based on on-x can completely eliminate warfarin and any need for anti coagulation.
Also remember that an adverse event can occur for any valve and has happened as well and hence certain things are not in our control. Select a good hospital , a good surgeon and place your trust on him. More importantly dont waste your pre surgery time stressing too much as I did.
I spoke to another surgeon in UK who uses on-x valve and he too did not push for a specific brand of valve.
When I spoke to a on-x sales rep, one of the things he mentioned was that "surgeon is more important than a make of a valve" for which I respect him a lot.
Good luck and try to be stress free
In my case, I really agonized over valve choice. I based my decision on an extensive discussion with my surgeon as well as input from my family who know me well. I also listened to my gut. I ended up with a CE perimount valve. It was not an easy decision but I made peace with it.
All the best to you! Whatever you choose will be the right one.
I spoke to my surgeon and he said he wasn't a fan of the on-x but if I wanted it he could get them. I asked why and his reasons were basically conservative and good.
I realized I didn't know squat about valves and I did not want advertising or hope to interfere, so i left the make, model and size up to him. I just chose basic type, mech vs tissue.
I realized I didn't know squat about valves and I did not want advertising or hope to interfere, so i left the make, model and size up to him. I just chose basic type, mech vs tissue.
Tom brought up a good point that I forgot to make. My decision making was more over mechanical vs. bioprosthetic. I, too let my surgeon assist with my decision making as to what the 'best type of valve' was for me. It just so happened that if we had decided on a mechanical valve, he would have implanted the ON-X as that is what was used at this heart centre. I, too put alot of weight on the experience and expertise of the surgeon.
pellicle
Professional Dingbat, Guru and Merkintologist
I discussed it with my surgeon and (not being anywhere near as experienced as him) relied on his guidance. He favoured the ATS valve (now Medtronics) for reasons such as ease of stitching, history of low complications, an aortic graft that was pre attached (and authorised for use in Australia).
He also favoured the haemodynamics of the ATS over the others, these were minor considerations, however with all the major candidates being so close to each other the reality is that it comes down to small factors or flipping coins to make a differentiate.
All of the pyrolytic carbon valves are very good. So you can't really make a bad choice in that set of valves.
I wish you all the best.
He also favoured the haemodynamics of the ATS over the others, these were minor considerations, however with all the major candidates being so close to each other the reality is that it comes down to small factors or flipping coins to make a differentiate.
All of the pyrolytic carbon valves are very good. So you can't really make a bad choice in that set of valves.
I wish you all the best.
Last edited:
I mentioned the On-x to my surgon as well, based on having read about it here, and having read the published studies available online. My surgeon was another of those who doesn't really believe there is much difference from one modern pyrolytic carbon valve to the next (I think most of them were actually designed by the same two people?). He did point out though, that he is in the habit of installing carbomedics valves as a first choice, and that they have an excellent record including no known mechanical failures, over a 20 year history of production. His subtle point was clearly that On-x 'might' be great, but we know that Carbomedics is quite good. In the end, I chose not to dispute his wisdom, and so the choice was between HIS choice of mechanical, or HIS choice of tissue, and that was fine with me. (I have the mechanical.)
Oilman
Well-known member
Oops, double post on iPad, sorry
Last edited:
Oilman
Well-known member
I have to admit that the opinion of others in this community played a part in my decision on the brand of mechanical valve. My choice of mechanical or tissue valve was a no brainier for me, as I came down with Afib prior to surgery and may not have been able to stop my warfarin treatment, I had been using it almost 3 years prior to valve replacement with no problems. Also all my doctor & surgeon opinion was that mechanical was a good fit for me due to the possibility of not having a re-op. I have been noticing that a lot of mechanical implants in this community have been getting On-X valves, but I do believe its the familiarity of the surgeon and the stock of choice at the hospital, just like others have said, any valve is a good choice. I have heard it said that the On-X valve is wider due to the addition of the pannus protection, so the implant may be a little harder or just different for some surgeons. Good luck with your choice, I'm sure it will be the right one for you.
Rachel
Well-known member
News of my condition and the preceding surgery occurred within a 3 month time period and so I did not have time (nor the insight) to even search out any form of help – like this group.
I went with a tissue valve based on my gut and my surgeon’s recommendation and I’m pretty sure I would have made that same decision in the same way even if I had been a member of this group.
Rachel
I went with a tissue valve based on my gut and my surgeon’s recommendation and I’m pretty sure I would have made that same decision in the same way even if I had been a member of this group.
Rachel
In the beginning, I did let a VR friend's view sway me. She had gone mechanical when she needed her aortic valve replaced. She use to say that she would never put her family through the stress of another surgery. However, I spent a long time in the waiting room and a long time on VR before undergoing my own valve replacement. By that time I had given serious consideration to the Ross Procedure and knew that I would go with a tissue valve whether I did the Ross or not. I do think my choice of a bovine over a porcine was influenced by what other members had done.
As for my dear friend, she was facing another cardiothoracic surgery, to repair an aortic aneurysm that developed and enlarged post valve replacement, when she died suddenly from a massive stroke.
As for my dear friend, she was facing another cardiothoracic surgery, to repair an aortic aneurysm that developed and enlarged post valve replacement, when she died suddenly from a massive stroke.
pellicle
Professional Dingbat, Guru and Merkintologist
Heart Of The Sunrise
Well-known member
I initially was thinking tissue. But, once I did my research and thought about the choice alot, I choose the On-X valve. The idea of another surgery or two lingering out there was simply something I would not want to live with. The possibilty of reduced coumadin or just asprin as a anti-coagulant would be a nice bonus in the future. However, so far I am doing fine with coumadin. Today was my first day back at work since surgery. I am very happy with my valve choice and the superior quality and recovery from my surgery! Reading about others and their experiences was a positive influence.
Last edited:
Ovie
Well-known member
I trusted my surgeon with my life, so I figured I trusted what he suggested with what type of valve and didnt second guess it. I'm alive as of now so I guess he's chosen a good one this far!
gerrychuck
Well-known member
I was spared the debate and the decision entirely; my diagnosis of mitral valve failure was made approximately one hour before I was in the OR having a St Jude's mechanical valve implanted. I was already sedated and on a respirator (I was a very, very sick puppy by that time), and the discussion of mech vs tissue was with my wife, and was very brief; the surgeon said he was going with mech because of my relatively young age (53) and I was already being wheeled into surgery as she was signing the papers, so she didn't exactly want to delay him with questions or debate, especially since the nice man had been called in at midnight on a Saturday night to save my life and all! I didn't know an On-X from a St Jude's until I got home after surgery and found this forum
dpalz
Active member
My surgeons experience (most type of valves used) along with his personal preference (although this was hard to get as he didn't want to influence my choice) and my age all led me to my valve choice. Make the best choice for you and try not to second guess it (easier said than done). Warfarin has not been an issue, other than it has helped me take better care of myself as far as a consistent diet is concerned (win/win). I really was leaning towards the On-X with the only reason being that at the time, they were offering a $200 rebate and a ring made of the same material as the valve. How cool would that be to share with somebody that your ring you a wearing is made of the same material as the valve in your heart! Probably not as fun as showing them the rebate checks (I would not cash them!) you received for the valve as well. I guess I like attention too much.... but hey! We are in a rather elite club, whether we like it or not!
No clicking nor do I notice my valve anymore, but it was loud at first and slowly quieted down over time. People who are within close proximity sometimes say they can hear it when the room is quiet, but that isn't often, I'm usually making other noises...haha
I wish you all the best. And I hope nothing sounded biased above. I hear the same good results about the tissue valves as well. Plus you don't have to take a pill.
No clicking nor do I notice my valve anymore, but it was loud at first and slowly quieted down over time. People who are within close proximity sometimes say they can hear it when the room is quiet, but that isn't often, I'm usually making other noises...haha
I wish you all the best. And I hope nothing sounded biased above. I hear the same good results about the tissue valves as well. Plus you don't have to take a pill.
TheGymGuy
Well-known member
I knew I wanted a mechanical valve to minimize the re-surgery risk. Coumadin, did not seem like much of a risk when monitored. Liked the idea of On-X, but would have settled for ATS or St. Jude as well. Chose on-x in the end.
Last edited:
In 1991, when I had my valve replaced, the choice was tissue or mechanical. For me, at 41, there was no real choice.
I chose mechanical, and my surgeon decided which one to use.
I didn't have the delicatessen menu that is now being offered -- I trusted my surgeon, and left it up to him and his team to decide which (if there was a choice) mechanical valve to use.
I chose mechanical, and my surgeon decided which one to use.
I didn't have the delicatessen menu that is now being offered -- I trusted my surgeon, and left it up to him and his team to decide which (if there was a choice) mechanical valve to use.
Liam
Member
I was planning on the On-x valve because of what I have read here, but was talked into a tissue valve by my surgeon. He stated he would gladly place an On-x valve if I insisted, but given his track record and expertise I decided to go with the tissue.
