On 8 Sep, 17:12, "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk
wrote:
OK, time for another update, as I saw a consultant again today.

My GP had also asked the opinion of a cardiologist friend of his, who had
said that five years ago he would have recommended an artificial valve for a
patient with my profile, but now would say go for a tissue valve. Not only
are they getting much better, but he thought that advances in techniques
would mean that, by the time it needed to be replaced, heart valve
replacement could be a day surgery operation. He also pointed out that stem
cell research is promising a total revolution in body parts replacement,
which could easily happen with the same timescale.

I had already rejected an artificial valve, because of the problems of
living on Warfarin. I wanted to discuss the Ross procedure with the
consultant, however, he said it involves such massive trauma, that he would
not want to perform it on anyone except an otherwise fit patient under the
age of 40. Apparently it also carries unique risks of its own. He was also
less enthusiastic about artificial valves than the previous consultant,
pointing out the multiple failure modes they can experience, which do not
affect tissue replacements. I tend to the view that sudden failure of a
heart valve is not a desirable occurrence. So, the final decision is to have
a tissue valve and watch for major advances in the next 10-20 years. The
consultant told me that the success rate is 98%, with the 2% who suffer
complications mainly being those who have other health problems, such as
having had previous bypass surgery, which means my chances should be even
better. The only question now is when, but that I will have to wait for the
answer to.

Thank you to everyone who has wished me well.

Colin Bignell

Best of luck mate.