Elmer
Review
ress
J Clin Med Res. 2015;7(12):932-936
Treatment of Prosthetic Valve Thrombosis: Current Evidence
and Future Directions
Murat Bitekera, Ibrahim Altuna, c, Ozcan Basarana, Volkan Dogana, Birdal Yildirimb,
Gokhan Erguna
Abstract
Prosthetic heart valve thrombosis (PVT) is a rare but serious complication with high morbidity and mortality. The optimal treatment
of the PVT is controversial and depends on thrombus location and
size, the patient’s functional class, the risk of surgery or thrombolysis, and the clinician’s experience. Although surgical therapy has been
the traditional therapeutic approach, studies with low-dose and slowinfusion rates of thrombolytic agents have revealed excellent results.
This article reviews the various treatment options in patient with PVT.
Keywords: Prosthetic valve thrombosis; Treatment; Thrombolysis;
Surgery
Introduction
Rheumatic valve diseases are the most frequently encountered
valvular pathology in developing countries and often require
surgical replacement with prosthetic valves. However, prosthetic heart valve thrombosis (PVT) is a life-threatening complication whose management remains controversial [1]. PVT
has an incidence from 0.1% to almost 6% per patient-year of
left-sided valves and up to 20% of tricuspid valves [2]. The
risk of PVT depends on valve type, anticoagulation status,
valve position, the presence of prothrombotic states such as
pregnancy, atrial fibrillation, and/or ventricular dysfunction.
The most common cause of PVT is inadequate anticoagulant
therapy [3]. PVT has been divided into two types, obstructive
PVT (OPVT) and non-obstructive PVT (NOPVT). Although
review of literature for management of PVT reveals no set
Manuscript accepted for publication October 12, 2015
aDepartment of Cardiology, Faculty of Medicine, Mugla Sitki Kocman University, Mugla, Turkey
bDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Mugla Sitki Kocman University, Mugla, Turkey
cCorresponding Author: Ibrahim Altun, Mugla Sitki Kocman Universitesi Tip
Fakultesi, Orhaniye Mah. Haluk Ozsoy Cad, 48000 Mugla, Turkey. Email:
ibrahim_altun@yahoo.com
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jocmr2392w
guidelines, thrombolytic therapy, intensification of anticoagulation, thrombectomy, or prosthetic valve replacement are the
currently available options [3]. In 1971, Luluaga et al were the
first to use the thrombolytic therapy in PVT [4]. Streptokinase
was used for treating thrombosis of thetricuspid valve prosthesis. Three years later, Baille et al reported the use of thrombolytic agent in a patient with aortic PVT [5]. Since then, several
cases of PVT have been reported, with varied rates of success
and complications.
There are a lack of randomized controlled prospective trials comparing surgical and thrombolytic therapies in PVT, but
it is shown that intravenous slow infusion thrombolysis given
in discrete, successive sessions guided by serial transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) can be achieved with a low risk
of complications and a high rate of success even in patients
with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III or IV [6].
In this review, we will discuss the current treatment options in
patients with PVT.
Diagnosis of PVT
Clinical features remain important for the diagnosis of PVT
in the modern era. OPVT can present along a wide spectrum
that includes systemic embolism, fatigue, shortness of breath,
acute haemodynamic deterioration and death [7]. Patients
with NOPVT present minimal clinical symptoms and they are
stable but they constitute a group of high embolic potential.
Distinction between thrombus and pannus formation based
on clinical grounds may be difficult. However, patients with
thrombus formation have usually shorter duration of symptoms and more often inadequate anticoagulation. In the clinical
suspicion of endocarditis, blood cultures should be performed.
Although physical examination is frequently insufficient, it
can reveal decreased prosthetic valve sounds, a new murmur,
or change in a previously detected murmur.
The examination of a patient with prosthetic cardiac valve
by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is an essential part
of diagnostic assessment. TTE examination can be limited
because the prosthesis produces a certain degree of acoustic
shadowing and reverberations which need to be distinguished
from vegetation or a thrombus. Doppler echocardiography is
the most accurate method for detecting and quantifying the
degree of transvalvar gradient increase and is useful in the
Articles © The authors | Journal compilation © J Clin Med Res and Elmer Press Inc™ | www.jocmr.org
932
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction
in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
Biteker et al
J Clin Med Res. 2015;7(12):932-936
Figure 1. Treatment algorithm for patients with prosthetic valve thrombosis. OPVT: obstructive prosthetic valve thrombosis;
NOPVT: non-obstructive prosthetic valve thrombosis.
follow-up of patients during thrombolysis. TEE can help to assess thrombus size and location by its high-resolution imaging
and can aid in treatment decisions, such as thrombolysis, anticoagulation, and surgery. TEE along with clinical parameters
can usually differentiate thrombus from pannus formation and
vegetation. The thrombus size visualized by TEE is important
in deciding on the optimal treatment strategy. When thrombolysis is contemplated, then TEE and Doppler echocardiography are the preferred modalities to assess serially the hemodynamic success of fibrinolysis. PRO-TEE study showed that,
a thrombus area < 0.8 cm2 confers a lower risk for embolism
or death associated with thrombolysis in left-sided OPVT [8].
Cinefluoroscopy provides the exact visualization of mechanical prosthetic heart valve leaflet motion [9]. It is readily available in most centers and can be performed rapidly,
particularly in unstable patients. Fluoroscopy is not useful in
distinguishing pannus from thrombus since neither pannus nor
thrombus can be identified fluoroscopically. However, it is a
low-cost, non-invasive imaging technique, with limited radiation exposure that allows the correct evaluation of opening and
closing angles and the motion of the base ring of the prosthetic
heart valve and can add diagnostic value to echocardiography
[10]. It carries advantage over TEE for the visualization of
leaflet motion in aortic prostheses, while the two modalities
demonstrate comparable results in mitral prostheses.
Multidetector cardiac computed tomography (MDCT) is
a promising technique for functional evaluation of bileaflet
mechanical valves, allowing reliable measurements of opening and closing leaflet angles [11]. Although the exact cut-off
attenuation values for the distinction between thrombus and
pannus have not been established, MDCT may allow the differentiation of two entities, which is difficult with TEE mainly
in the aortic position [12].
Real-time three-dimensional (3D) TEE provides a live
“en face” surgical view of the valves, which can improve diagnostic accuracy for detecting prosthetic valve pathologies.
The detection of NOPVT can be challenging, especially when
Doppler parameters are within normal limits and clinical findings are subtle. Ozkan and colleagues found that real-time 3D
TEE provides a more comprehensive delineation of non-obstructive mitral prosthetic valve ring thrombosis by depicting
the morphology of thrombus with “en face” images that could
be missed with 2D TEE [13].
Treatment of PVT
The optimal managament of PVT remains controversial. The
different therapeutic modalities available for PVT are largely
influenced by the presence of valvular obstruction, by valve
location (left- or right-sided), and by clinical status. In this review, we evaluated the management strategies of PVT according to presence of obstruction and prosthesis location (Fig. 1).
Right-sided OPVT and NOPVT
PVT is the most important and common complication of the
mechanical tricuspid valve. Mechanical prosthetic valves are
rarely implanted in the right heart, mainly because of their important thrombogenicity. The incidence of mechanical tricuspid valve thrombosis may be up to 20% during the first postoperative year [14]. Although there are no formal prospective
studies evaluating different treatment modalities, intensified
anticoagulation should be the first choice of treatment in patients with non-obstructive right-sided PVT. Patients with obstructive tricuspid valve thrombosis usually present with signs
of right heart failure, such as peripheral edema and ascites, and
the prosthetic valve click may be inaudible during the auscultation. Both TTE and TEE can reveal the increased echogenicity on the prosthesis, decreased movement of the disc, and an
elevated prosthetic valve gradient. The treatment of choice
Articles © The authors | Journal compilation © J Clin Med Res and Elmer Press Inc™ | www.jocmr.org
933
Prosthetic Valve Thrombosis
in right-sided OPVT is thrombolytic therapy, and fibrinolytic
agents have been associated with a high success rate and a low
complication rate [3]. There is no risk of cerebral embolism
and the incidence of thromboembolism to the lungs is usually
less serious than a cerebrovascular episode. Surgery should
be reserved for cases with a pannus, thrombolytic failure, and
contraindication to thrombolysis. Replacement of the mechanical tricuspid valve with a bioprosthesis can be considered in
patients with failed thrombolysis, recurrent thrombosis, evidence of pannus or contraindications to thrombolytic therapy.
Left-sided NOPVT
The management options of NOPVT are based mainly on
small samples observational studies. The size of the thrombus
is the most important factor determining the embolic potential of a NOPVT. When a cut-off value of 5 mm was used to
define large thrombi, most complications occurred in patients
where the NOPVT was > 5 mm in size. In a study conducted
by Gueret and coworkers, all patients with a small (< 5 mm)
NOPVT had an uneventful course with appropriate treatment,
whereas five of the six patients with a large thrombus suffered
a major embolic event [15]. Laplace et al, using the same cutoff of 5 mm, also reported similar results in a larger study [16],
with early and late thromboembolic events numbering respectively one and three events in the group with a small thrombus
(n = 29), and three and 11 events in the group with a large
thrombus (n = 33). Moreover, while the embolic events were
transient ischemic attacks in the small thrombus group, they
were either stroke or clot enlargement causing obstruction of
the valve in the large thrombus group.
Bemurat et al found that the prognosis is favorable with
medical therapy by optimization of anticoagulant treatment
(short-term intravenous unfractionated heparin followed by
warfarin adjustment and aspirin addition) for small asymptomatic thrombi (length < 10 mm) [17]. If thrombus size is increased or is complicated by embolism, thrombolytic therapy
or surgery should be considered [18]. The use of low-molecular-weight heparin in left-sided NOPVT is not clear yet.
According to the 2012 European Society of Cardiology
and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery
guidelines, management of left-sided NOPVT depends mainly
on the occurrence of a thromboembolic event and the size of
the thrombus [19]. These guidelines recommend surgery for
large (≥ 10 mm) NOPVT complicated by embolism (recommendation class IIa, level of evidence C) or which persists
despite optimal anticoagulation [19]. Fibrinolysis may be considered if surgery is at high risk.
However, Nagy and coworkers reported that there was
no significant difference in the outcome (successand complication) of thrombolytic treatment according to thrombus size
[20]. These authors recommended thrombolytic treatment as
the initial treatment in all PVTs, including all NOPVT, if the
thrombus diameter is 5 mm or greater [20]. The TROIA study
evaluated a strategy of TEE-guided fibrinolysis in with rapid
infusion of streptokinase (group I) versus slow infusion of
streptokinase (group II) versus full-dose tissue plasminogen
activator (t-PA) (100 mg) (group III) versus half dose (50 mg)
934
J Clin Med Res. 2015;7(12):932-936
slow infusion of t-PA (group IV) versus low dose (25 mg) slow
infusion of t-PA (group V) [6]. The investigators performed a
single-center, prospective cohort study involving 182 patients
with 220 episodes of PVT from 1993 to 2009, with a key feature of the study being that enrollment in the study arms was
non-randomized and occurred sequentially during the study
period. All patients with OPVT, patients with NOPVT with recent systemic thromboembolism, patients with asymptomatic
NOPVT with a thrombus diameter of at least 10 mm, and PVT
patients with ischemic stroke were included. Patients with
asymptomatic NOPVT without a history of recent thromboembolism and with a thrombus diameter of < 10 mm were not
included into the TROIA study. The investigators report successful thrombolysis in 83.2% of cases without a significant
difference between thrombolytic protocols (68.8%, 85.4%,
75.0%, 81.5%, and 85.5%, respectively; P = 0.46). Analysis of
complication rates by group showed a statistically lower combined complication rate in group V (10.5%) compared with
all other groups (37.5%, 24.4%, 33.3%, 29.6%, and 10.5%,
respectively; P = 0.01 for group I vs. group V, 0.03 for group
II vs. group V, 0.04 for group III vs. group V, and 0.03 for
group IV vs. group V). The PVT was obstructive in 105 episodes (47.7%) and non-obstructive in 115 (52.3%). Success
rate was 87% in NOPVT, and 79% in OPVT (P = 0.12). Combined complication rates were 7.8% vs. 13.3% in NOPVT and
OPVT groups (P = 0.18), respectively.
This study showed that the reduced-dose protocol (25 mg
of tPA infused over 6 h) of thrombolytic treatment is effective with very low complications in patients with NOPVT and
OPVT.
Left-sided OPVT
The treatment of OPVT includes surgery (thrombectomy or
valve replacement), thrombolytic therapy, and heparin; however, the optimal management is controversial. Once a diagnosis of prosthetic valve thrombotic obstruction has been made,
heparin treatment should be started immediately. Unfortunately, heparin therapy is clearly inferior to both surgery and
thrombolysis for obstructive thrombosis cases, and should not
be considered a definitive treatment. Mortality rates following
surgery mainly depend on the NYHA class of the patient; those
patients in classes I to III have a mortality rate of 4.7%, whereas 60% of patients in class IV die during the intraoperative
or postoperative period [21]. Roudaut and coworkers reported
their non-randomized, retrospective, and single-center study
on prosthetic valve obstruction in 210 patients (263 episodes)
[22]. The study results showed that the two treatment arms had
similar mortality rates (surgery 10% versus fibrinolysis 11%),
and the authors favored surgical therapy over fibrinolysis as
the embolic and major bleeding complications in the fibrinolytic group were higher than in those patients treated surgically (15% to 0.7%, and 4.7% to 0.7%, respectively). In addition, complete hemodynamic success was obtained in only
70% of cases with fibrinolytic therapy (compared to 89% with
surgery). In an international multicenter registry (PRO-TEE
study), patients with PVT underwent thrombolysis, and all
of them had undergone TEE before therapy [8]. The registry
Articles © The authors | Journal compilation © J Clin Med Res and Elmer Press Inc™ | www.jocmr.org
Biteker et al
J Clin Med Res. 2015;7(12):932-936
comprised 107 patients, 93 of whom had OPVT, and 14 had
NOPVT.
The agents used for fibrinolysis were streptokinase
(54.7%), urokinase (17%), and t-PA (28.9%). All fibrinolytic agents were administered for a longer period of time, and
streptokinase was even used for 120 h. The t-PA dosage was a
10-mg bolus, followed by 90 mg in 2 - 6 h. Complete hemodynamic success was achieved in 76.3% of the 93 obstructed
valves and was similar among different valves and lytic agents.
Partial hemodynamic success was infrequently seen (8.6%).
This study found a previous history of cerebrovascular event
and a thrombussize > 0.8 cm2 as one of the major risk factors
for systemic embolic complications of thrombolytic therapy.
In the most recent European [19] and American guidelines
[23], surgery is recommended for patients in NYHA functional classes III and IV unless surgery is high risk (class IIA).
Thrombolysis is given a IIA indication in patients with rightsided valve thrombosis and a class IIB indication in patients
with a left-sided but small thrombus. The European Society of
Cardiology guidelines [24] also emphasize surgery for critically ill patients and restrict thrombolysis to patients with high
surgical risk and/or right-sided valve thrombosis. However, the
results of more recent studies have reported better outcomes
with thrombolytic therapy than did the previous reports, and
suggested that thrombolytic therapy would be the treatment of
choice in all cases except for patients with contraindications
to these agents. Caceres-Loriga and colleagues reported complete success in 85% of cases and partial success in 6% with
thrombolytic therapy in their study with 68 patients during a
6-year period [24]. Nagy and coworkers reported the results of
thrombolytic therapy in 62 OPVT cases [20]; complete success was achieved in 73% of these cases, and partial success
in 21%, while the mortality (8%) and embolic complication
(12%) rates of thrombolytic therapy were similar to those of
previous studies, and superior to surgery.
In a recent literature survey 17 studies with clinical outcomes of 756 patients who received thrombolytic agents for
treatment of 801 episodes of OPVT were analyzed [25]. Of
the data that were available in 665 patients, 35% presented in
NYHA functional classes I/II and 65% presented in NYHA
functional classes III/IV. Complete success was achieved in
81% of patients presenting in NYHA functional classes I/II
and 74% of patients presenting in NYHA functional classes
III/IV. Streptokinase was used in 12 of the 17 studies. The rate
of thromboembolism was 14% and the overall 30-day mortality was 8%.
In the largest series of patients with PVT, atrial fibrillation,
obstructive thrombus, larger thrombus, and poor functional capacity, the so-called predictors of poor outcome in thrombolytic treatment of PVT, did not seem to predict the combined
endpoint in PVT patients [6]. However, similar to the PROTEE study, thrombi > 0.9 cm2 were associated with increased
major and minor embolic events. TROIA trial also showed that
slow infusion of 25 mg t-PA without a bolus appears to be the
safest thrombolytic regimen with lower complication and mortality rates for both OPVT and NOPVT compared with higher
doses or rapid infusions of streptokinase or t-PA.
Patients with thrombotic material in the left atrium are
at increased risk of major embolism and stroke when treated
with thrombolytic therapy [26]. Although a few reports of successful thrombolysis of left atrial thrombi have been published
[27], presence of a large left atrial thrombus is accepted as a
contraindication for thrombolysis and should be ruled out by
TEE before the start of thrombolytic treatment. However, there
is no precise definition of the “large” thrombus in the current
literature.
Conclusions and Future Directions
One of the most life-threatening complications of mechanical prostheses is valvular obstruction by pannus, thrombus, or
both. Until the 1990s, the treatment of choice for mechanical valve obstruction was surgery but over the last decade,
thrombolyis has been used increasingly and has become an
alternative to surgery as the first-line therapy in patients with
PVT. Tissue plasminogen activator at a low dose and with
prolonged infusion time has recently contributed to the success of thrombolytic therapy, with decreased complication
rates. Further decrease of tPA with prolongation of the regimen may be associated with lower complication rates. Lowdose and ultra-slow infusion of tPA may be a preferred alternative treatment regimen for PVT in the future. The recently
initiated two studies will provide important information for the
management of PVT. SAFE-PVT (surgery versus fibrinolytic
therapy for left-sided prosthetic heart valve thrombosis) study
(NCT01641549) will randomize 150 patients at a single center
in India to surgical valve replacement or thrombectomy versus
first-line therapy with fibrinolysis with streptokinase or an alternative fibrinolytic agent. The second trial (NCT02243839)
is a randomized and multicenter study, comparing thrombolytic therapy versus surgery for the treatment of patients with
OPVT. Two different randomization groups are defined and
patients with OPVT will be included in each group randomly.
In the first arm, thrombolytic therapy will be performed to the
patients. The thrombolytic therapy regimen depends on the
functional status of the patient. In patients with NYHA class
III-IV symptoms 25 mg tPA will be given in 6 h and in patients
with NYHA class I-II dyspnea 25 mg tPA will be given in 25 h.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
Cevik C, Izgi C, Dechyapirom W, Nugent K. Treatment of prosthetic valve thrombosis: rationale for a prospective randomized clinical trial. J Heart Valve Dis.
2010;19(2):161-170.
Hermans H, Vanassche T, Herijgers P, Meuris B, Herregods MC, Van de Werf F, Verhamme P. Antithrombotic
therapy in patients with heart valve prostheses. Cardiol
Rev. 2013;21(1):27-36.
Duran NE, Biteker M, Ozkan M. [Treatment alternatives
in mechanical valve thrombosis]. Turk Kardiyol Dern
Ars. 2008;36(6):420-425.
Luluaga IT, Carrera D, D'Oliveira J, Cantaluppi CG, Santin H, Molteni L, Ferreira R, et al. Successful thrombolytic therapy after acute tricuspid-valve obstruction. Lancet.
1971;1(7708):1067-1068.
Articles © The authors | Journal compilation © J Clin Med Res and Elmer Press Inc™ | www.jocmr.org
935
Prosthetic Valve Thrombosis
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
936
Baille Y, Choffel J, Sicard MP, Malmejac C, Metras D,
Delaye A, Manuel C, et al. [Letter: Thrombolytic treatment of thromboses due to valvular prosthesis]. Nouv
Presse Med. 1974;3(19):1233.
Ozkan M, Gunduz S, Biteker M, Astarcioglu MA, Cevik C, Kaynak E, Yildiz M, et al. Comparison of different
TEE-guided thrombolytic regimens for prosthetic valve
thrombosis: the TROIA trial. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging.
2013;6(2):206-216.
Bonou M, Lampropoulos K, Barbetseas J. Prosthetic heart
valve obstruction: thrombolysis or surgical treatment?
Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2012;1(2):122-127.
Tong AT, Roudaut R, Ozkan M, Sagie A, Shahid MS, Pontes Junior SC, Carreras F, et al. Transesophageal echocardiography improves risk assessment of thrombolysis of
prosthetic valve thrombosis: results of the international
PRO-TEE registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43(1):77-84.
Gursoy MO, Kalcik M, Karakoyun S, Ozkan M. The current status of fluoroscopy and echocardiography in the
diagnosis of prosthetic valve thrombosis-a review article.
Echocardiography. 2015;32(1):156-164.
Kalcik M, Gursoy OM, Astarcioglu MA, Ozkan M. A
serial fluoroscopy-guided thrombolytic therapy of a mechanical tricuspid prosthetic valve thrombosis with lowdose and ultra-slow infusion of tissue-type plasminogen
activator. Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars. 2014;42(5):478-481.
Biteker M, Gunduz S, Ozkan M. Role of MDCT in the
evaluation of prosthetic heart valves. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(2):W77; author reply W78.
Symersky P, Budde RP, de Mol BA, Prokop M. Comparison of multidetector-row computed tomography to echocardiography and fluoroscopy for evaluation of patients
with mechanical prosthetic valve obstruction. Am J Cardiol. 2009;104(8):1128-1134.
Ozkan M, Gursoy OM, Astarcioglu MA, Gunduz S,
Cakal B, Karakoyun S, Kalcik M, et al. Real-time threedimensional transesophageal echocardiography in the
assessment of mechanical prosthetic mitral valve ring
thrombosis. Am J Cardiol. 2013;112(7):977-983.
Caceres-Loriga FM, Perez-Lopez H, Santos-Gracia J,
Morlans-Hernandez K. Prosthetic heart valve thrombosis:
pathogenesis, diagnosis and management. Int J Cardiol.
2006;110(1):1-6.
Gueret P, Vignon P, Fournier P, Chabernaud JM, Gomez
M, LaCroix P, Bensaid J. Transesophageal echocardiography for the diagnosis and management of nonobstructive thrombosis of mechanical mitral valve prosthesis.
Circulation. 1995;91(1):103-110.
Laplace G, Lafitte S, Labeque JN, Perron JM, Baudet E,
Deville C, Roques X, et al. Clinical significance of early
thrombosis after prosthetic mitral valve replacement: a
J Clin Med Res. 2015;7(12):932-936
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
postoperative monocentric study of 680 patients. J Am
Coll Cardiol. 2004;43(7):1283-1290.
Bemurat LR, Laffort PR, Deville CJ, Roques XG, Baudet EM, Roudaut RP. Management of Nonobstructive
Thrombosis of Prosthetic Mitral Valve in Asymptomatic
Patients in the Early Postoperative Period: A Study in 20
Patients. Echocardiography. 1999;16(4):339-346.
Kalcik M, Gu Rsoy OM, Karakoyun SL, Ozkan M.
Thrombus attached to suture materials successfully
thrombolysed with low-dose tissue plasminogen activator. Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars. 2014;42(1):61-63.
Vahanian A, Alfieri O, Andreotti F, Antunes MJ, BaronEsquivias G, Baumgartner H, Borger MA, et al. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012). Eur Heart J. 2012;33(19):2451-2496.
Nagy A, Denes M, Lengyel M. Predictors of the outcome of thrombolytic therapy in prosthetic mitral valve
thrombosis: a study of 62 events. J Heart Valve Dis.
2009;18(3):268-275.
Deviri E, Sareli P, Wisenbaugh T, Cronje SL. Obstruction
of mechanical heart valve prostheses: clinical aspects and
surgical management. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;17(3):646650.
Roudaut R, Lafitte S, Roudaut MF, Reant P, Pillois X,
Durrieu-Jais C, Coste P, et al. Management of prosthetic
heart valve obstruction: fibrinolysis versus surgery. Early
results and long-term follow-up in a single-centre study
of 263 cases. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2009;102(4):269-277.
Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Erwin JP, 3rd, Guyton RA, O'Gara PT, et al. 2014 AHA/
ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of
Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on
Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(22):e57185.
Caceres-Loriga FM, Perez-Lopez H, Morlans-Hernandez
K, Facundo-Sanchez H, Santos-Gracia J, Valiente-Mustelier J, Rodiles-Aldana F, et al. Thrombolysis as first choice
therapy in prosthetic heart valve thrombosis. A study of
68 patients. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2006;21(2):185190.
Huang G, Schaff HV, Sundt TM, Rahimtoola SH. Treatment of obstructive thrombosed prosthetic heart valve. J
Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62(19):1731-1736.
Duran NE, Biteker M, Ozkan M. [Coexistence of obstructive mechanical mitral valve and left atrial thrombosis].
Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars. 2008;36(6):426.
Schmid C, Gulba DC, Heublein B, Kemnitz J, Haverich
A. Systemic recombinant tissue plasminogen activator
lysis for left atrial thrombus formation after single-lung
retransplantation. Ann Thorac Surg. 1992;53(2):338-340.
Articles © The authors | Journal compilation © J Clin Med Res and Elmer Press Inc™ | www.jocmr.org