Literature DB >> 17306709

Impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch and aortic valve design on coronary flow reserve after aortic valve replacement.

Farhad Bakhtiary1, Mirko Schiemann, Omer Dzemali, Selami Dogan, Volker Schächinger, Hans Ackermann, Anton Moritz, Peter Kleine.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This prospective-randomized study investigated the effect of aortic valve design and patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) on coronary flow reserve (CFR) after mechanical or biological aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with aortic stenosis (AS).
BACKGROUND: Coronary flow reserve may be an important parameter of long-term survival after AVR in patients with AS. Reduced CFR may contribute to more cardiovascular events and greater rates of mortality.
METHODS: A total of 48 patients undergoing AVR underwent magnetic resonance imaging for the measurement of coronary flow preoperatively, 5 days postoperatively, and at 6-month follow-up with measurement of CFR. Patients scheduled for mechanical AVR were randomized to a tilting disc or bileaflet prosthesis (n = 12 in each group). For biological AVR, patients were scheduled to receive a stented (n = 12) or stentless (n = 12) valve. Patients also underwent echocardiography with measurement of transvalvular pressure gradients and left ventricular mass regression.
RESULTS: Postoperatively, coronary flow increased significantly in all groups (p < 0.001). Only stentless valves demonstrated a normal CFR (3.4 +/- 0.3 vs. 2.3 +/- 0.1 for stented biological valves, 2.1 +/- 0.2 for tilting disc, and 2.2 +/- 0.3 for bileaflet mechanical valves). Patient-prosthesis mismatch with an indexed effective orifice area <0.85 cm2/m2 led to decreased rates of CFR in the tilting disc, stentless, and stented groups. Pressure gradients were 14 +/- 3 mm Hg for tilting disc, 12 +/- 4 mm Hg for bileaflet, 19 +/- 6 mm Hg for stented, and 10 +/- 4 mm Hg for stentless valves.
CONCLUSIONS: Normalization of CFR after AVR in patients with AS was observed only for stentless valves. Coronary flow reserve might explain the excellent long-term results for stentless valves. (Impact of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch on Coronary Flow Reserve; http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00310947?order=1; NCT00310947).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17306709     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.10.052

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  10 in total

1.  Transcatheter resection of the native aortic valve prior to endovalve implantation - A rational approach to reduce TAVI-induced complications.

Authors:  Parla Astarci; Pierre-Yves Etienne; Benoit Raucent; Xavier Bollen; Kahn Tranduy; David Glineur; Laurent Dekerchove; Philippe Noirhomme; Gébrine Elkhoury
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2012-07

Review 2.  [Surgical treatment of aortic valve stenosis].

Authors:  O J Liakopoulos; J Merkle; T Wahlers; Y-H Choi
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 1.443

3.  Incidence and sequelae of prosthesis-patient mismatch in transcatheter versus surgical valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: a PARTNER trial cohort--a analysis.

Authors:  Philippe Pibarot; Neil J Weissman; William J Stewart; Rebecca T Hahn; Brian R Lindman; Thomas McAndrew; Susheel K Kodali; Michael J Mack; Vinod H Thourani; D Craig Miller; Lars G Svensson; Howard C Herrmann; Craig R Smith; Josep Rodés-Cabau; John Webb; Scott Lim; Ke Xu; Irene Hueter; Pamela S Douglas; Martin B Leon
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2014-09-30       Impact factor: 24.094

4.  Mid-term clinical and health-related quality of life outcomes for the Trifecta bioprosthesis.

Authors:  Biswarup Purkayastha; Md Wasim Khan; Atanu Saha; Debasis Das; Lalit Kapoor; Mrinalendu Das; Pradeep Narayan
Journal:  Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2021-04-27

Review 5.  Prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Authors:  Masaki Miyasaka
Journal:  Cardiovasc Interv Ther       Date:  2022-06-16

6.  In-vivo assessment of the morphology and hemodynamic functions of the BioValsalva™ composite valve-conduit graft using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and computational modelling technology.

Authors:  Emaddin Kidher; Zhuo Cheng; Omar A Jarral; Declan P O'Regan; Xiao Yun Xu; Thanos Athanasiou
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 1.637

7.  Pulmonary hypertension in cardiac surgery.

Authors:  André Denault; Alain Deschamps; Jean-Claude Tardif; Jean Lambert; Louis Perrault
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rev       Date:  2010-02

Review 8.  Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch After Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Abdellaziz Dahou; Haïfa Mahjoub; Philippe Pibarot
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2016-11

9.  Application of Regent mechanical valve in patients with small aortic annulus: 3-year follow-up.

Authors:  Dong Zhao; Chunsheng Wang; Tao Hong; Cuizhen Pan; Changfa Guo
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2012-09-21       Impact factor: 1.637

10.  Risk and Timing of Noncardiac Surgery After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Authors:  Taishi Okuno; Caglayan Demirel; Daijiro Tomii; Gabor Erdoes; Dik Heg; Jonas Lanz; Fabien Praz; Rainer Zbinden; David Reineke; Lorenz Räber; Stefan Stortecky; Stephan Windecker; Thomas Pilgrim
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-07-01
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.