Literature DB >> 17532940

The impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch on late outcomes after mitral valve replacement.

Buu-Khanh Lam1, Vincent Chan, Paul Hendry, Marc Ruel, Roy Masters, Pierre Bedard, Bill Goldstein, Fraser Rubens, Thierry Mesana.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The incidence of patient-prosthesis mismatch after mitral valve replacement and its effect on late outcomes have remained unclear. This study was conducted to determine the impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch on recurrent congestive heart failure, postoperative pulmonary hypertension, and late survival after mitral valve replacement.
METHODS: Between 1985 and 2005, 884 patients, with a mean age 63 +/- 12 years, underwent mitral valve replacement (657 mechanical, 227 bioprosthesis) with contemporary prostheses. Mean clinical and echocardiographic follow-up was 5.1 +/- 4.1 years (4344 patient-years). Patient-prosthesis mismatch was defined as an indexed effective orifice area of 1.25 cm2/m2 or less. Parametric and nonparametric analyses were used to determine predictors of outcomes.
RESULTS: The incidence of patient-prosthesis mismatch was 32%. Predictors of recurrent congestive heart failure included low indexed effective orifice area, low ejection fraction, elevated postoperative mean mitral gradient, and use of a bioprosthesis (P < or = .05). Postoperative pulmonary hypertension was associated with small mitral size, elevated mean mitral gradient, low ejection fraction, and atrial fibrillation (P < or = .05); indexed effective orifice area did not predict postoperative pulmonary hypertension (P = .89). Poor late survival was predicted by low indexed effective orifice area (< or =1.25 cm2/m2), New York Heart Association class 3 or 4, elevated right ventricular pressure, stroke, older age, coronary artery disease, and bioprosthesis use (P < or = .05). Survival for patients with patient-prosthesis mismatch versus those without patient-prosthesis mismatch at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years was 91% versus 95%, 85% versus 90%, 78% versus 86%, and 65% versus 75%, respectively (P = .05).
CONCLUSIONS: Patient-prosthesis mismatch after mitral valve replacement is not uncommon; it is associated with recurrence of congestive heart failure and postoperative pulmonary hypertension and independently affected late survival. This study emphasizes the importance of implanting a sufficiently large prosthesis in adult patients undergoing mitral valve replacement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17532940     DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2006.12.071

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0022-5223            Impact factor:   5.209


  16 in total

Review 1.  Prosthesis-patient mismatch: an update.

Authors:  Jean G Dumesnil; Philippe Pibarot
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 2.931

2.  Factors affecting survival after mitral valve replacement in patients with prosthesis-patient mismatch.

Authors:  Abdulhameed Aziz; Jennifer S Lawton; Hersh S Maniar; Michael K Pasque; Ralph J Damiano; Marc R Moon
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 4.330

3.  Patient-prosthesis mismatch in the mitral position affects midterm survival and functional status.

Authors:  Denis Bouchard; Frédéric Vanden Eynden; Philippe Demers; Louis P Perrault; Michel Carrier; Raymond Cartier; Arsène J Basmadjian; Michel Pellerin
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 5.223

4.  Predictors of persistent pulmonary hypertension after mitral valve replacement.

Authors:  Sem Briongos Figuero; José Luis Moya Mur; Alberto García-Lledó; Tomasa Centella; Luisa Salido; Álvaro Aceña Navarro; Ana García Martín; Ignacio García-Andrade; Enrique Oliva; José Luis Zamorano
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 5.  Pulmonary Hypertension in Heart Failure.

Authors:  Albert Youngwoo Jang; Su Jung Park; Wook-Jin Chung
Journal:  Int J Heart Fail       Date:  2021-04-21

6.  Pregnancy in women with prosthetic heart valves.

Authors:  P G Pieper; A Balci; A P Van Dijk
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 2.380

7.  Weight gain potential-a neglected entity during valve replacement.

Authors:  Vijayanand Palanisamy; Karthik Raman; Anjith Prakash Rajakumar; Anbarasu Mohanraj; Jacob Jamesraj; Ejaz Ahmed Sheriff; Valikapthalil Mathew Kurian; Rajan Sethuratnam
Journal:  Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2019-07-19

8.  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

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.  Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch after Mitral Valve Replacement: Comparison of Different Methods of Effective Orifice Area Calculation.

Authors:  In Jeong Cho; Geu Ru Hong; Seung Hyun Lee; Sak Lee; Byung Chul Chang; Chi Young Shim; Hyuk Jae Chang; Jong Won Ha; Namsik Chung
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 2.759

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.