BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The study aim was to evaluate left ventricular mass (LVM) regression, survival and quality of life in elderly patients after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with small-sized bileaflet prostheses. METHODS: Between September 1988 and September 2005, a total of 147 patients aged > 70 years underwent AVR with 19-mm bileaflet prostheses for aortic stenosis. In order to evaluate the impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) on long-term outcome, survivors were allocated to two groups according to the effective orifice area index (EOAI): group A, with EOAI < 0.85 cm2/m2, and group B with EOAI > or = 0.85 cm2/m2. Hospital survivors were interviewed using the SF-36 questionnaire, and the scores compared with those of age- and gender-matched members of the general Italian population. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 74.5 +/- 3.5 years, body surface area (BSA) 1.68 +/- 0.15 m2, and EOAI 0.73 +/- 0.2 cm2/m2. Hospital mortality was 8.8% (n = 13). Actuarial survival was 87.1 +/- 0.028% at one year, 81.3 +/- 0.035% at five years, and 77.2 +/- 0.044% at eight years. Eight-year survival was 74.0 +/- 0.062% in group A and 82.5 +/- 0.064% in group B (p = 0.29). Echocardiographic follow up showed a significant regression of LVM. Scores obtained in the SF-36 test were similar in the two groups, and significantly higher than those of the general Italian population matched for age and gender (p < 0.001 in all domains). CONCLUSION: The implantation of 19-mm bileaflet mechanical prostheses in the elderly allowed LVM regression and a good perceived quality of life. PPM did not influence the long-term survival of these patients.
BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The study aim was to evaluate left ventricular mass (LVM) regression, survival and quality of life in elderly patients after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with small-sized bileaflet prostheses. METHODS: Between September 1988 and September 2005, a total of 147 patients aged > 70 years underwent AVR with 19-mm bileaflet prostheses for aortic stenosis. In order to evaluate the impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) on long-term outcome, survivors were allocated to two groups according to the effective orifice area index (EOAI): group A, with EOAI < 0.85 cm2/m2, and group B with EOAI > or = 0.85 cm2/m2. Hospital survivors were interviewed using the SF-36 questionnaire, and the scores compared with those of age- and gender-matched members of the general Italian population. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 74.5 +/- 3.5 years, body surface area (BSA) 1.68 +/- 0.15 m2, and EOAI 0.73 +/- 0.2 cm2/m2. Hospital mortality was 8.8% (n = 13). Actuarial survival was 87.1 +/- 0.028% at one year, 81.3 +/- 0.035% at five years, and 77.2 +/- 0.044% at eight years. Eight-year survival was 74.0 +/- 0.062% in group A and 82.5 +/- 0.064% in group B (p = 0.29). Echocardiographic follow up showed a significant regression of LVM. Scores obtained in the SF-36 test were similar in the two groups, and significantly higher than those of the general Italian population matched for age and gender (p < 0.001 in all domains). CONCLUSION: The implantation of 19-mm bileaflet mechanical prostheses in the elderly allowed LVM regression and a good perceived quality of life. PPM did not influence the long-term survival of these patients.
Authors: M W A van Geldorp; H J Heuvelman; A P Kappetein; J J V Busschbach; J J M Takkenberg; A J J C Bogers Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 2.380