Conventional Aortic Valve Replacement: Standard Therapy in the 1990s and the Development of Minimally Invasive Approaches

References
1 David TE, Bos J, Rakowski H. Aortic valve replacement with the Toronto SPV bioprosthesis. J Heart Valve Dis 1992; 1 (2) 244-248
2 Mohr FW, Walther T, Baryalei M , et al. The Toronto SPV bioprosthesis: one-year results in 100 patients. Ann Thorac Surg 1995; 60 (1) 171-175
3 Walther T, Falk V, Autschbach R , et al. Hemodynamic assessment of the stentless Toronto SPV bioprosthesis by echocardiography. J Heart Valve Dis 1994; 3 (6) 657-665
4 Walther T, Falk V, Langebartels G , et al. Prospectively randomized evaluation of stentless versus conventional biological aortic valves: impact on early regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. Circulation 1999; 100 (19, Suppl): II6-II10
5 Walther T, Schubert A, Falk V , et al. Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy after surgical therapy for aortic stenosis is associated with changes in extracellular matrix gene expression. Circulation 2001; 104 (12) (Suppl. 01) I54-I58
6 Walther T, Schubert A, Falk V , et al. Left ventricular reverse remodeling after surgical therapy for aortic stenosis: correlation to Renin-Angiotensin system gene expression. Circulation 2002; 106 (12) (Suppl. 01) I23-I26
7 Autschbach R, Walther T, Falk V , et al. Prospectively randomized comparison of different mechanical aortic valves. Circulation 2000; 102 (19) (Suppl. 03) III1-III4
8 Walther T, Lehmann S, Falk V , et al. Experimental evaluation and early clinical results of a new low-profile bileaflet aortic valve. Artif Organs 2002; 26 (5) 416-419
9 Walther T, Falk V, Tigges R , et al. Comparison of On-X and SJM HP bileaflet aortic valves. J Heart Valve Dis 2000; 9 (3) 403-407
10 Walther T, Lehmann S, Falk V , et al. Prospectively randomized evaluation of stented xenograft hemodynamic function in the aortic position. Circulation 2004; 110 (11) (Suppl. 01) II74-II78
11 Lehmann S, Walther T, Kempfert J , et al. Stentless versus conventional xenograft aortic valve replacement: midterm results of a prospectively randomized trial. Ann Thorac Surg 2007; 84 (2) 467-472
12 Autschbach R, Walther T, Falk V, Diegeler A, Metz S, Mohr FW. S-shaped in comparison to L-shaped partial sternotomy for less invasive aortic valve replacement. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1998; 14 (Suppl. 01) S117-S121
13 Doll N, Borger MA, Hain J , et al. Minimal access aortic valve replacement: effects on morbidity and resource utilization. Ann Thorac Surg 2002; 74 (4) S1318-S1322
14 Walther T, Falk V, Metz S , et al. Pain and quality of life after minimally invasive versus conventional cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 1999; 67 (6) 1643-1647
15 Lim JY, Deo SV, Altarabsheh SE , et al. Conventional versus minimally invasive aortic valve replacement: pooled analysis of propensity-matched data. J Card Surg 2015; 30 (2) 125-134
16 Phan K, Xie A, Di Eusanio M, Yan TD. A meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2014; 98 (4) 1499-1511
17 Glauber M, Ferrarini M, Miceli A. Minimally invasive aortic valve surgery: state of the art and future directions. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 2015; 4 (1) 26-32