Michael's Posts

G'day Michael, sorry to hear about your complications. I also have an aortic st jude medical heart valve which was done in 2006. Only months after some of the stitching failed and I had to be reoperated in 2007. A large percentage of people with bicuspid aortic valve disease is associated with calcification of valve and native tissue surrounding the valve which is why stitching can fail causing paravalular leaks. After my reoperation in 2007 echo's showed up mild regurgitation which has progressively worsened to now becoming severe. February this year I was referred to a surgeon who ordered all the pre surgery tests ie. CT,TOE & coronary angiogram to determine where the leak was. Those tests showed that again it was a paravalular leak and not through my st jude medical heart valve due to stitching failure into calcified tissue. A reoperation for me is apparently high risk as it would be my 4th open heart surgery and would likely fail again. Scans showed the leak to be 8mm by 4mm in size so my interventional cardiologist wants to have a crack at plugging the leak via a catheter through my groin using an amplatzer plug. He has only carried out this procedure 12 times and 2 of those unsuccessful as the plugs came out. Anyway he is "reasonably" confident he can plug it so he is going to have a crack at it on the 2nd of August which is an over night stay in hospital. If successful would be a much better option and recovery than another full sternotomy. We will see how it goes. Not sure if that has any relationship with your situation or if your aortic valve was bicuspid but calcification and BAV is often linked together. Hopefully you get the answers you are looking for and a quick resolution. All the best.

Tim...Wow, sorry to hear your complications. My first thought was perhaps scar tissue around the stitching and calcification build up. I will inquire about doing an echo to see if a possibility. I am having deja vu symptoms similar to those when my BAV went into full stenosis. ...I shudder at the thought of another OHS...somewhat of an over reaction by me at this early stage. Hopefully a reasonable explanation awaits me. thanks again, and best of luck to you!

It is my understanding that coronary arteries are not bypassed until they are 70% or more blocked, or the patient has symptoms. So when we are told " no blockages" after Our cath, they mean no blockages worth bypassing. Once again, this is my understanding. i would ask if you are on a statin , and whether you can improve your diet towards a plant based one. Check out the Ornish Diet, because diet, exercise and statins can reverse coronary artery disease. Wishing you all the best!

Hi Michael, in 2015 I had 3 heart attacks and subsequently 3 stents were inserted in left side of my heart. I was told my right side was blocked over 50% and they did nothing at the time. Fast forward to this March where after an undiagnosed Infective Endocarditis I had to have my mitral valve replaced because of vegetation’s on the leaflets and severe regurgitation. I also had heart failure and pulmonary failure prior to my OHS. Whilst under having the valve replaced they also did a double bypass on the right side. Although the right side was pretty much shot back in 2015 I still had a very active lifestyle and had no heart problems until recently. Naturally I am functioning better with the bypass but it was a matter of my recent episode which made it worse. I’m sorry to learn of the battles in your heart journey and wish you success and fast recovery back to normal. Cheers mate

Thanks to all for your comments. Yes, I was told I was at around 50% blockage following OHS January 2017...and yes, I was informed 70% is threshold, though to me that would mean if nothing else is going on....yet when already in there, it just does not make any sense to me...and apparently the 50% was noted during the heart cath...somewhat poo-poo said something along the lines of "some minor blockage". The CT scan that used the word severe caused me concern, not my Cardio...wrote off to well, that's the radiologist's impression and doubtful I progressed from the 50% in such short of a time span...perhaps medically accurate, though not all patients are the same...demonstrated time and again on this very community. ...so my concern shifted to the latest report of the thoracic aortic calcification, not noted perviously (year and a half ago). Generally I am optimistic and was during the aortic valve replacement...and remain cautiously optimistic about this latest development. Will see what my Cardio has to say, and will report back. Thanks Again!