Literature DB >> 15740953

Patient-prosthesis mismatch in aortic valve replacement: really tolerable?

Rafael García Fuster1, José A Montero Argudo, Oscar Gil Albarova, Fernando Hornero Sos, Sergio Cánovas López, María Bueno Codoñer, José A Buendía Miñano, Ignacio Rodríguez Albarran.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Several studies have demonstrated favorable results despite patient-prosthesis mismatch after aortic valve replacement with the use of third generation prostheses. Our aim was to determine whether this mismatch is always tolerable.
METHODS: A clinical-echocardiographic study has been performed in 339 consecutive patients who underwent aortic valve replacement because of aortic stenosis. In-hospital outcome and left ventricular mass index regression (1st month-1st year) were analyzed in the presence or absence of mismatch (indexed effective orifice area < or =0.85cm(2)/m(2)). The influence of high degrees of preoperative left ventricular mass on in-hospital mortality has also been evaluated. Left ventricular mass index was considered increased if the calculated value was over the superior quartile of the frequency distribution of all the values observed in both sexes.
RESULTS: Mismatch was found in 38% of the patients. In the absence of mismatch, the absolute mass regression was proportional to the preoperative left ventricular mass. This regression was higher in patients with increased left ventricular mass indexed (vs not increased): -38.0+/-7.8 vs -8.8+/-4.7g/m(2), p<0.01 (1st month) and -67.7+/-16.9vs -23.5+/-6.7g/m(2), p<0.05 (1st year). Mass regression was impaired in the presence of mismatch, particularly, in patients with previously increased left ventricular mass: -8.2+/-11.6 vs -5.6+/-6.3g/m(2) (p=0.83) and -24.6+/-12.6 vs -11.7+/-10.5g/m(2) (p=0.54). This worse regression was reflected on a 100% incidence of residual hypertrophy at follow-up (1st month-1st year). In the presence of mismatch, increased ventricular mass was associated with higher mortality: 14.7% vs 2.1% (p<0.01). In the absence of mismatch, ventricular mass was not associated with mortality: 4.1 vs 2.5% (p=0.55).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe ventricular hypertrophy it may be important to elude patient-prosthesis mismatch to avoid a significant increase in mortality and improve ventricular mass regression. Mismatch may be tolerable in those patients with lesser degree of hypertrophy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15740953     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2004.11.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg        ISSN: 1010-7940            Impact factor:   4.191


  14 in total

1.  Clinical value of regression of electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy after aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Sayuri Yamabe; Yoshihiro Dohi; Akifumi Higashi; Hiroki Kinoshita; Yoshiharu Sada; Takayuki Hidaka; Satoshi Kurisu; Nobuo Shiode; Yasuki Kihara
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2015-11-03       Impact factor: 2.037

2.  Longitudinal strain predicts left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis and preserved left ventricular function.

Authors:  Sandro Gelsomino; Fabiana Lucà; Orlando Parise; Roberto Lorusso; Carmelo Massimiliano Rao; Enrico Vizzardi; Gian Franco Gensini; Jos G Maessen
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2012-11-21       Impact factor: 2.037

3.  Patient prosthesis mismatch and its impact on left ventricular regression following aortic valve replacement in aortic stenosis patients.

Authors:  Abid Iqbal; Varghese Thomas Panicker; Jayakumar Karunakaran
Journal:  Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2018-08-28

4.  Effect of prosthesis-patient mismatch on survival after aortic valve replacement using mechanical prostheses in patients with aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Koji Tsutsumi; Masashi Nagumo; Kuni Nishikawa; Ryuichi Takahashi
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2008-12-16

5.  Patient-prosthesis mismatch after aortic valve replacement in the elderly.

Authors:  Masaaki Ryomoto; Masataka Mitsuno; Mitsuhiro Yamamura; Hiroe Tanaka; Yasuhiko Kobayashi; Shinya Fukui; Noriko Tsujiya; Tetsuya Kajiyama; Yuji Miyamoto
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2008-07-08

6.  Effects of transcatheter aortic valve implantation on left ventricular mass and global longitudinal strain: tissue Doppler and strain evaluation.

Authors:  E Vizzardi; E Sciatti; I Bonadei; R Rovetta; A D'Aloia; S Gelsomino; R Lorusso; F Ettori; M Metra
Journal:  Heart Lung Vessel       Date:  2014

7.  Incidence and Impact of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch in Isolated Aortic Valve Surgery.

Authors:  Selman Dumani; Ermal Likaj; Andi Kacani; Laureta Dibra; Elizana Petrela; Vera Beca; Ali Refatllari
Journal:  Open Access Maced J Med Sci       Date:  2015-10-15

8.  Impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch on short-term outcomes after aortic valve replacement: a retrospective analysis in East China.

Authors:  Lei Guo; Junnan Zheng; Liangwei Chen; Renyuan Li; Liang Ma; Yiming Ni; Haige Zhao
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2017-05-25       Impact factor: 1.637

9.  An underreported consequence of obesity in pregnancy: patient-prosthesis mismatch.

Authors:  William R Hartman; Katherine W Arendt; Kent H Rehfeldt
Journal:  Case Rep Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-07-08

10.  Determinants of clinical improvement after surgical replacement or transcatheter aortic valve implantation for isolated aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Cristina Gavina; Alexandra Gonçalves; Carlos Almeria; Rosana Hernandez; Adelino Leite-Moreira; Francisco Rocha-Gonçalves; José Zamorano
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2014-10-06       Impact factor: 2.062

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.