Skip to main content
  • American Heart Association
  • Science Volunteer
  • Warning Signs
  • Advanced Search
  • Donate

  • Home
  • About this Journal
    • Editorial Board
    • General Statistics
    • Circulation Doodle
      • Doodle Gallery
      • Circulation Cover Doodle
        • → Blip the Doodle
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Author Reprints
    • Commercial Reprints
    • Customer Service and Ordering Information
    • Subscribe to AHA Journals
  • All Issues
  • Subjects
    • All Subjects
    • Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research
    • Critical Care and Resuscitation
    • Epidemiology, Lifestyle, and Prevention
    • Genetics
    • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Hypertension
    • Imaging and Diagnostic Testing
    • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Quality and Outcomes
    • Stroke
    • Vascular Disease
  • Browse Features
    • AHA Guidelines and Statements
      • Recently Published Guidelines
    • Bridging Disciplines
    • → Articles Bridging Discplines
    • Go Red for Women Issue
    • Cardiovascular Case Series
    • Circulation at ESC
    • Circulation at AHA Scientific Sessions
    • Global Impact of the 2017 ACC/AHA Hypertension Guidelines
    • Circulation at ACC 2018
    • Circulation Supplements
    • ECG Challenge
    • Hospitals of History
      • Brigham and Women's Hospital
      • Hartford Hospital
      • Hospital Santa Maria del Popolo, Naples, Italy
      • Instituto do Coração-INCOR (São Paulo, Brasil)
      • Minneapolis City Hospital
      • Parkland Hospital: Dallas, Texas
      • Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia
      • Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital
      • Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Scotland
      • Tufts Medical Center
      • University of Michigan
      • Uppsala University Hospital
      • Vassar Brothers Medical Center (Poughkeepsie, NY)
      • Wroclaw Medical University
      • Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Canada
      • Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan
      • Instituto Nacional de Cardiología Ignacio Chávez – INCICh México City, México
      • Kuang-Tien General Hospital (Taichug, Taiwan)
    • On My Mind
    • Podcast Archive
    • → Subscribe to Circulation on the Run
    • →Circulation FIT Podcast 2018
    • → #FITFAVs
  • Resources
    • Instructions for Authors
      • Accepted Manuscripts
      • Revised Manuscripts
    • → Article Types
    • → General Preparation Instructions
    • → Research Guidelines
    • → How to Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Permissions and Rights Q&A
    • Submission Sites
    • Circulation CME
    • AHA Journals RSS Feeds
    • International Users
    • AHA Newsroom
  • AHA Journals
    • AHA Journals Home
    • Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology (ATVB)
    • Circulation
    • → Circ: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • → Circ: Genomic and Precision Medicine
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Imaging
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Interventions
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Quality & Outcomes
    • → Circ: Heart Failure
    • Circulation Research
    • Hypertension
    • Stroke
    • Journal of the American Heart Association
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

  • My alerts
  • Sign In
  • Join

  • Advanced search

Header Publisher Menu

  • American Heart Association
  • Science Volunteer
  • Warning Signs
  • Advanced Search
  • Donate

Circulation

  • My alerts
  • Sign In
  • Join

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • About this Journal
    • Editorial Board
    • General Statistics
    • Circulation Doodle
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Author Reprints
    • Commercial Reprints
    • Customer Service and Ordering Information
    • Subscribe to AHA Journals
  • All Issues
  • Subjects
    • All Subjects
    • Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research
    • Critical Care and Resuscitation
    • Epidemiology, Lifestyle, and Prevention
    • Genetics
    • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Hypertension
    • Imaging and Diagnostic Testing
    • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Quality and Outcomes
    • Stroke
    • Vascular Disease
  • Browse Features
    • AHA Guidelines and Statements
    • Bridging Disciplines
    • → Articles Bridging Discplines
    • Go Red for Women Issue
    • Cardiovascular Case Series
    • Circulation at ESC
    • Circulation at AHA Scientific Sessions
    • Global Impact of the 2017 ACC/AHA Hypertension Guidelines
    • Circulation at ACC 2018
    • Circulation Supplements
    • ECG Challenge
    • Hospitals of History
    • On My Mind
    • Podcast Archive
    • → Subscribe to Circulation on the Run
    • →Circulation FIT Podcast 2018
    • → #FITFAVs
  • Resources
    • Instructions for Authors
    • → Article Types
    • → General Preparation Instructions
    • → Research Guidelines
    • → How to Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Permissions and Rights Q&A
    • Submission Sites
    • Circulation CME
    • AHA Journals RSS Feeds
    • International Users
    • AHA Newsroom
  • AHA Journals
    • AHA Journals Home
    • Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology (ATVB)
    • Circulation
    • → Circ: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • → Circ: Genomic and Precision Medicine
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Imaging
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Interventions
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Quality & Outcomes
    • → Circ: Heart Failure
    • Circulation Research
    • Hypertension
    • Stroke
    • Journal of the American Heart Association
Clinician Update

Prosthetic Heart Valves and Pregnancy

Lynne Hung, Shahbudin H. Rahimtoola
Download PDF
https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000060806.86686.EC
Circulation. 2003;107:1240-1246
Originally published March 11, 2003
Lynne Hung
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shahbudin H. Rahimtoola
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters

Jump to

  • Article
    • Mechanical Valves
    • Biological Valves
    • Conclusions
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
Loading

In patients with prosthetic heart valves (PHV), pregnancy is associated with the risks of warfarin embryopathy in patients with mechanical PHV and of structural valve deterioration (SVD), both early and late, in patients with biological PHV.

Mechanical Valves

Warfarin

The use of warfarin, particularly between the 6th and 12th weeks of pregnancy, is associated with an embryopathy, “warfarin embryopathy,”1,2 which is characterized by nasal hypoplasia and/or stippled epiphyses.3 Uncommon features, including central nervous system and eye abnormalities, may be due to warfarin exposure during the second and third trimester.3

There is a wide range of the reported incidence of warfarin embryopathy (Table 1).3–18 Ten studies comprising 427 pregnancies reported the incidence was zero (Table 1). From the patient’s point of view, the incidence per live birth may be more important; four recent (between 1994 and 99) studies reported an incidence of 3/189 (1.6%) live births7,9,17,18 (Table 1). One group has shown that the risk of warfarin embryopathy was extremely low in the 33 women who needed ≤5 mg of warfarin to maintain an adequate INR.14,18

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup

TABLE 1. Incidence of Warfarin Embryopathy

The incidence of warfarin embryopathy will be lower with use of IV unfractionated heparin in the first 3 months (especially between the 6th to 12th weeks) of pregnancy; one review concluded that this strategy “eliminated the risk.”19 IV unfractionated heparin use in the last 2 weeks of pregnancy is associated with a reduced risk of hemorrhage during delivery and the neonatal period in the mother, as well as in the baby, because warfarin crosses the placenta, and therefore, the fetus/baby is anticoagulated. To reduce the latter complication, some have suggested elective caesarian section in the 38th week of pregnancy.17,18

An earlier study reported the incidence of abortion and stillbirths in these patients was higher than in the population;6 in a subsequent study the incidence was similar.9

Subcutaneous Heparin

The recommendation for use of subcutaneous heparin in pregnancy by Ginsberg et al is based on: (1) its value in patients with angina and myocardial infarction20; and (2) a study of 100 pregnancies in 77 women.21 In 98 of the 100 pregnancies, heparin therapy was given for prevention or treatment of thromboembolism, and in 2/100 pregnancies it was given for women with PHV.21 Oakley has criticized this recommendation.22 The incidence of thromboembolism on heparin therapy during pregnancy in patients with a mechanical prosthesis is 4 times greater than in those treated with oral anticoagulants.17 Two studies from the same institution documented mechanical PHV thrombosis with subcutaneous heparin.7,8 In one study, 2/23 (8.7%) patients had massive valve thrombosis.8 In the other study, in 22 pregnant7 patients with mechanical valves, one had a cerebral embolus and 3 (14%) died, one from gastrointestinal bleeding and 2 with thrombosed PHV. Subcutaneous heparin does not improve fetal outcome and increases maternal mortality.

Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin

There are no good data at the present time documenting the benefits for the use of low-molecular-weight heparin in patients with PHV.

Case reports of thrombosed PHV with the use of low-molecular-weight heparin have been reported.23 The FDA24 has issued additions to the warnings and precautions sections of the Lovenox (enoxaparin sodium) product labeling. These warnings point out:

  • This product (a low-molecular-weight heparin) is not recommended for thrombotic prophylaxis in patients with PHV;

  • Cases of PHV thrombosis and of maternal and fetal deaths have been reported with use of this drug;

  • Furthermore, in pregnant women who received this drug, both teratogenic and nonteratogenic effects have been reported.

Biological Valves

Bioprostheses (Heterografts)

Operative mortality at initial PHV insertion was 4.3%.27

Pregnancy in women with a bioprosthesis is associated with SVD; the incidence may average 24% during or shortly after pregnancy9,11,15,17,25 (Table 2⇓). After bioprosthetic PHV valve replacement, the incidence of SVD at 10 years was 55 to 76%; the incidence of PHV-related re-operation was 60 to 80%26,27 (Table 3⇓). The incidence of SVD in those who were subsequently pregnant versus those who were not was 76.7±14% versus 25.8±8.5% (P<0.05) in one study26 and 55.3±8.2% versus 45.7±4.8% (P=NS) in another.27 The issue is not similar rates of SVD in women with or without subsequent pregnancy. An important issue is the very high rate of bioprosthetic SVD in people aged 16 to 40 years at the time of PHV implantation: ≈50% at 10 years and 90% at 15 years (Figure).28 Furthermore, SVD begins 2 to 3 years after PHV implantation in this age group (Figure). The mortality of re-operation is 3.8% to 8.7%.26,27

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup

TABLE 2. Bioprostheses and Pregnancy: Early SVD

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup

TABLE 3. Bioprostheses and Pregnancy: Late Complications (10 y)

Figure1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Percent freedom from structural valve deterioration in 1408 patients who received the Hancock MO, Hancock standard, and Carpentier-Edwards porcine bioprosthesis by age of patients at time of PHV implantation at Stanford University. Note: in patients aged 16 to 49 at time of PHV implantation, SVD began at years 2 to 3 after PHV implantation and is about 50% at 10 years and 90% at 15 years. Reprinted with permission from reference 28.

At 9 years, the rate of SVD of newer porcine valves and the stentless porcine valve is within the expected range of SVD earlier stented porcine valves,29 indicating that at present all porcine valves have similar rates of SVD; however, data are not available for pregnant women.

Four important issues to consider before bioprosthetic PHV is implanted in young women before pregnancy are:

  • Some may suffer SVD even before their first pregnancy

  • Some may suffer SVD during pregnancy or soon after delivery

  • If women have babies before SVD and die at re-operation, the babies/children will be without a biological mother

  • With mitral bioprosthesis, the rate of SVD will be higher than that cited above for aortic valve replacement with a bioprosthesis.

Sbarouni and Oakley have asked, “Why should young women be singled out for obligatory re-operation with its attendant risks?”9

Homografts (Allografts)

Homografts (allografts) have the same rate of SVD as porcine bioprosthesis29,30; data are not available for preg-nant women with long-term follow-up.

Autografts (Pulmonary Autograft for Aortic Valve Replacement [Ross Principle])

The Ross31 principle is a more complex and more difficult procedure, but has at least some advantages. For example, when inserted in children, the valve increases in size as the child grows. Of 8 women who had 14 pregnancies32 after receiving a pulmonary autograft, one woman developed dilated cardiomyopathy (peripartum cardiomyopathy?) 6 months after delivery, one developed obstruction of the unsupported fascial pulmonary valve, and one developed acute endocarditis of the freeze-dried aortic homograft that had been inserted in the pulmonary position. The remaining 5 patients were well at last follow-up.

A review of this procedure30 showed that:

  • Thrombo-emboli was 0% to 1.2% per year

  • Infective endocarditis was 0% to 1.2% per year

  • Re-operation within the first 6 months was 0%, 1.5%, 3.8%, and 10% in four different studies

  • Late re-operation rates ranged from 0.4% to 1.5% per year

There is a risk of rheumatic valvulitis in the autograft in those who have rheumatic heart valve disease.33,34

The only studies with a follow-up of >10 years are from Ross’s group (Table 4).35–38 The freedom from autograft replacement ranged from 48.5±13.7% at 19 years to 85% at 20 years; the most likely explanation for this wide range is selection of patients reported in these 4 studies. In the series from only the National Heart Hospital:38

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup

TABLE 4. Ross Procedure by D.N. Ross

  • Operative mortality was 13%

  • In operative survivors (ie, excluding operative mortality), late mortality was 40.5% and actuarially determined mortality at 15 and 20 years was 25% and 39%, respectively

  • Actuarially determined freedom from autograft replacement was 75% at 20 years.

Conclusions

Mechanical Valves

  • Patients with mechanical valves need close monitoring of warfarin therapy during pregnancy. Substitution of warfarin with IV unfractionated heparin in the first 6 to 12 weeks and last 2 weeks of pregnancy is associated with a low rate of warfarin embryopathy and of bleeding in the mother and baby. The initiation of heparin therapy is clinically most feasible and practical at 4 to 6 weeks of pregnancy. Women who need ≤5 mg of warfarin are probably at low risk for fetal warfarin embryopathy and may be able to receive warfarin throughout pregnancy, but more data are needed.

  • Subcutaneous heparin and low molecular weight heparin cannot be recommended at the present time in such patients.

Biological Valves

  • Bioprostheses have a risk of early SVD during or shortly after the end of pregnancy. Moreover, at 10 years there is a high rate of SVD (55% to 77%) and of valve-related re-operation (60% to 80%).

  • Both men and women aged 16 to 40 years at time of bioprosthetic PHV implantation are at risk of SVD, which begins 2 to 3 years after valve replacement; at 10 to 15 years, the rate of SVD is very high (50% to 90%).

  • One has to balance the risks of SVD and its consequences to the mother and family in those who receive a bioprosthetic PHV versus the small risk of warfarin embryopathy in the fetus in those women who receive a mechanical PHV.

  • There are no data in patients who had received a homograft.

  • More data are needed in patients who have had the pulmonary autograft procedure according to the Ross principle.

  • If anticoagulation is needed the use of LMWH is of concern because the FDA has cited the occurrence of both teratogenic and non-teratogenic effects with use of LMWH.24 More data, including randomized trials, are needed.

Management Strategies

The management of young women with VHD who are contemplating a future pregnancy, the choice of PHV if one is necessary, and the management of such patients during pregnancy are outlined in algorithms 1 to 6⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓. Patients with aortic or mitral regurgitation (AR and MR, respectively) can cope with the volume load of pregnancy better than patients with severe valve stenosis because the reduction of systemic vascular resistance during pregnancy favors a reduction of aortic or mitral regurgitation. The volume load associated with pregnancy is not well tolerated in the presence of a severe valve stenosis (aortic stenosis as valve area ≤1.0 cm2; ≤0.6 cm2/m2) or mitral stenosis (mitral valve area ≤1.0 cm2).

Figure2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Algorithm 1.

Figure3
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Algorithm 2.

Figure4
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Algorithm 3.

Figure5
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Algorithm 4.

Figure6
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Algorithm 5.

Figure7
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Algorithm 6.

References

  1. ↵
    Hall JG. Embryopathy associated with oral anticoagulant therapy. Birth Defects. 1965; 12: 133–140.
    OpenUrl
  2. ↵
    Sahul WL, Emery H, Hall JG. Chondrodysplasia punctata and maternal warfarin use during pregnancy. Am J Dis Child. 1975; 129: 360–362.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    Hall JAG, Paul RM, Wilson KM. Maternal and fetal sequelae of anticoagulation during pregnancy. Am J Med. 1980; 68: 122–140.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    Ben-Ismail M, Fekih M, Taktak M, et al. Prostheses Valvulaires Cardiaques et Grossesse. Arch Mal Coeur. 1979; 2: 192–194.
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    Chen WWC, Chau CS, Lee PK, et al. Pregnancy in patients with prosthetic heart-valves: an experience with 45 pregnancies. Q J Med. 1982; 51: 358–365.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    Larrea JL, Nunez L, Reque JA, et al. Pregnancy and mechanical valve prosthesis: a high-risk situation for the mother and the fetus. Ann Thorac Surg. 1983; 36: 459–463.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    Salazar E, Izaguirre R, Verdejo J, et al. Failure of adjusted doses of subcutaneous heperin to prevent thrombo-embolic phenomena in pregnant patients with mechanical cardiac valve prosthesis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996; 27: 1698–1703.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    Iturbe-Alessio I, del Carmen Fonseca M, Mutchinik O, et al. Risks of anticoagulant therapy in pregnant women with artificial heart valves. N Engl J Med. . 1986; 315: 1390–1393.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. ↵
    Sbarouni E, Oakley CM. Outcome of pregnancy in women with valve prosthesis. Br Heart J. 1994; 71: 196–201.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    Chong MKB, Harvey D, Deswiet M. Follow-up study of children whose mothers were treated with warfarin during pregnancy. Br J Obs Gynae. 1984; 91: 1070–1073.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. ↵
    Salazar E, Zajarias A, Gutierrez N, et al. The problem of cardiac valve prosthesis, anticoagulant, and pregnancy. Circulation. 1984; 70 (suppl 1): 169–177.
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    Pavunkumar P, Venugopal P, Kaul U, et al. Pregnancy in patients with prosthetic cardiac valve. a 10-year experience. Scand J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1988; 22: 19–22.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  13. ↵
    Sareli P, England MJ, Berk MR, et al. Maternal and fetal sequelae of anticoagulation during pregnancy in patients with mechanical heart-valve prostheses. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1989; 63: 1462–1465.
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    Cotrufo M, de Luca TSL, Calabro R, et al. Coumadin anticoagulation during pregnancy in patients with mechanical valve prostheses. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1991; 5: 300–305.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    Born D, Martinez EE, Almeida PAM, et al. Pregnancy in patients with prosthetic heart valves: the effects of anticoagulation on mother, fetus, and neonate. Am Heart J. 1992; 124: 413–417.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    Wong V, Cheng CH, Chan KC. Fetal and neonatal outcome of exposure to anticoagulants during pregnancy. Am J Med Genet. 1993; 45: 17–21.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    Hanania G, Thomas D, Michel PL, et al. Pregnancy in patients with valvular prostheses-retrospective cooperative study in France (155 cases). J Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss. 1994; 87: 429–437.
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    Vitale N, Feo MD, DeSanto LS, et al. Dose-dependent fetal complications of warfarin in pregnant women with mechanical heart valves. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999; 33: 1637–1641.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    Chan WC, Anand S, Ginsberg JS. Anticoagulation of pregnant women with mechanical valves: a systemic review of the literature. Arch Int Med. 2000; 160: 191–196.
    OpenUrl
  20. ↵
    Ginsberg JS, Barron WM. Pregnancy and prosthetic heart valves. Lancet. 1994; 344: 1170–1172.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    Ginsberg JS, Kowalchuk G, Hirsh J, et al. Heparin therapy during pregnancy-risks to the fetus and mother. Arch Int Med. 1989; 149: 2233–2236.
    OpenUrl
  22. ↵
    Oakley CM. Anticoagulants in pregnancy. Br Heart J. 1995; 74: 107–111.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  23. ↵
    Idir M, Madonna F, Rondant R. Collapse and massive pulmonary edema secondary to thrombosis of a mitral mechanical heart valve prosthesis during low-molecular weight- heparin therapy. J Heart Valve Dis. 1999; 8: 303–304.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  24. ↵
    FDA Med Watch. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/medwatch. Accessed July 20, 2002.
  25. ↵
    Bartolloti U, Milano A, Massucco A, et al. Pregnancy in patients with a porcine valve bioprosthesis. Am J Cardiol. 1982; 50: 1051–1054.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    Badduke ER, Jamieson RE, Miyashima RT, et al. Pregnancy and childbearing in a population with biologic valvular prostheses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1991; 102: 179–186.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  27. ↵
    Jamieson WRE, Miller DC, Akins CW, et al. Pregnancy and bioprosthesis: influence on structural valve deterioration. Ann Thorac Surg. 1995; 60: S282–S287.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    Yun KL, Miller DC, Moore KA, et al. Durability of the Hancock MO bioprosthesis compared with the standard aortic valve bioprosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg. 1995; 60: 5221–228.
    OpenUrl
  29. ↵
    Rahimtoola SH. Choice of prosthetic heart valve for adult patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. In press.
  30. ↵
    Grunkemeier GL, Li H-H, Naftel DC, et al. Long-term performance of heart valve prosthesis. Curr Probl in Cardiol. 2000; 25: 73–156.
    OpenUrl
  31. ↵
    Ross DN. The pulmonary autograft: the Ross principle (or Ross procedural confusion). J Heart Valve Dis. 2000; 9: 174–175.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  32. ↵
    Dore A, Sommerville J. Pregnancy in patients with pulmonary autograft valve replacement. Eur Heart J. 1997; 18: 1659–1662.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. ↵
    Choudhary SK, Mather A, Chandler H, et al. Aortic valve replacement with biological substitute. J Cardiac Surg. 1998; 13: 1–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    Pieters FAA, Al-Halees 2, Hatle L, et al. Results of the Ross operation in rheumatic versus non-rheumatic aortic valve disease. J Heart Valve Dis. 2000; 9: 38–44.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  35. ↵
    Matsuki O, Okita Y, Almeida RS, et al. Two decades experience with aortic valve replacement with pulmonary autograft. J Thoracic Cardiovasc Surg. 1988; 95: 705–711.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  36. ↵
    Ross D, Jackson M, Davies J. Pulmonary autograft aortic valve replacement: long-term results. J Cardiac Surg. 1991; 6 (suppl): 529–533.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  37. ↵
    Ross D, Jackson M, Davies J. The pulmonary autograft: a permanent aortic valve. Eur J Cardio-Thorac Surg. 1992; 6: 113–117.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. ↵
    Chambers JC, Somerville J, Stone S, et al. Pulmonary autograft procedure for aortic valve disease: long-term results of the pioneer series. Circulation. 1997; 96: 2206–2214.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

This Issue

Circulation
March 11, 2003, Volume 107, Issue 9
  • Table of Contents
Previous ArticleNext Article

Jump to

  • Article
    • Mechanical Valves
    • Biological Valves
    • Conclusions
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters

Article Tools

  • Print
  • Citation Tools
    Prosthetic Heart Valves and Pregnancy
    Lynne Hung and Shahbudin H. Rahimtoola
    Circulation. 2003;107:1240-1246, originally published March 11, 2003
    https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000060806.86686.EC

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
  •  Download Powerpoint
  • Article Alerts
    Log in to Email Alerts with your email address.
  • Save to my folders

Share this Article

  • Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Circulation.

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Prosthetic Heart Valves and Pregnancy
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from Circulation
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the Circulation web site.
  • Share on Social Media
    Prosthetic Heart Valves and Pregnancy
    Lynne Hung and Shahbudin H. Rahimtoola
    Circulation. 2003;107:1240-1246, originally published March 11, 2003
    https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000060806.86686.EC
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo

Related Articles

Cited By...

Subjects

  • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Valvular Heart Disease
  • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Cardiovascular Surgery
    • Anticoagulants

Circulation

  • About Circulation
  • Instructions for Authors
  • Circulation CME
  • Statements and Guidelines
  • Meeting Abstracts
  • Permissions
  • Journal Policies
  • Email Alerts
  • Open Access Information
  • AHA Journals RSS
  • AHA Newsroom

Editorial Office Address:
200 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1020
Waltham, MA 02451
email: circ@circulationjournal.org
 

Information for:
  • Advertisers
  • Subscribers
  • Subscriber Help
  • Institutions / Librarians
  • Institutional Subscriptions FAQ
  • International Users
American Heart Association Learn and Live
National Center
7272 Greenville Ave.
Dallas, TX 75231

Customer Service

  • 1-800-AHA-USA-1
  • 1-800-242-8721
  • Local Info
  • Contact Us

About Us

Our mission is to build healthier lives, free of cardiovascular diseases and stroke. That single purpose drives all we do. The need for our work is beyond question. Find Out More about the American Heart Association

  • Careers
  • SHOP
  • Latest Heart and Stroke News
  • AHA/ASA Media Newsroom

Our Sites

  • American Heart Association
  • American Stroke Association
  • For Professionals
  • More Sites

Take Action

  • Advocate
  • Donate
  • Planned Giving
  • Volunteer

Online Communities

  • AFib Support
  • Garden Community
  • Patient Support Network
  • Professional Online Network

Follow Us:

  • Follow Circulation on Twitter
  • Visit Circulation on Facebook
  • Follow Circulation on Google Plus
  • Follow Circulation on Instagram
  • Follow Circulation on Pinterest
  • Follow Circulation on YouTube
  • Rss Feeds
  • Privacy Policy
  • Copyright
  • Ethics Policy
  • Conflict of Interest Policy
  • Linking Policy
  • Diversity
  • Careers

©2018 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. The American Heart Association is a qualified 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization.
*Red Dress™ DHHS, Go Red™ AHA; National Wear Red Day ® is a registered trademark.

  • PUTTING PATIENTS FIRST National Health Council Standards of Excellence Certification Program
  • BBB Accredited Charity
  • Comodo Secured