Table 1: Pooled data from 2002 to 2014 on On-X valve.
Study | n | Female n (%) | Total Thromboembolism rate (%/patient-year) | Follow up | Anticoagulation | INR Goal |
Chambers, 2013 [4] | 214 | 56(26) | 0.6 | 5.2 y | Warfarin | 2.0-3.0 |
Williams, 2004 [5] | 44 | 2.2 (late: 1.8) | 3.3 y | Warfarin | 1.5-2.5 | |
Moidl, 2002* [6] | 303 | 95(31) | 1.32 | 23 m | Warfarin | 2.5-3.5 |
Ozyurda, 2005 [7] | 120 | 42(35) | 0.12 | 38.4 m | Warfarin | 2.0 – 3.0 |
Palatianos, 2007 [8] | 184 | 63(34) | 0.88 | 5 y | Warfarin | 2.5 – 3.5 |
Chan, 2010 [9] | 400 | 107(27) | 0.94 | 2.8y | Warfarin | 2.0 – 2.5 |
McNicholas, 2006 * [10] | 142 | 40(28) | 2.8 | 4.5 y | Warfarin | |
Sasaki, 2007 [11] | 1 | 0 (0) | 0 | na | Warfarin | 1.8 – 2.0 |
Tossios, 2007* [12] | 264 | 77(29) | 1.49 | 3.9 y | Warfarin | 2.5-3.5 |
Chambers, 2005 [13] | 27 | 10(37) | 1 TIA < 30d, 1 TIA 30d-1y, 1 death < 30d | 1 y | na | --- |
Laczkovics, 2001* [14] | 184 | 103(56) | 1.7 | 11 m | na | na |
Dohmen, 2000* [15] | 27 | 2 patient TIA | na | na | na | |
PROACT (Puskas 2014) [16] | 185 | 37(20) | 1.97 | 3.42y | Low dose warfarin | 1.5 – 2.0 |
PROACT CONTROL | 190 | 36(19) | 1.18 | 3.42y | Warfarin | 2.0 – 3.0 |
Williams 2006* [17] | 104 | 1.1 | 1.8 y | Warfarin | na |