Literature DB >> 18836879

Validity of identifying patient-prosthesis mismatch from the indexed effective orifice area.

Yoshimasa Sakamoto1, Kazuhiro Hashimoto, Hiroshi Okuyama, Shinichi Ishii, Noriyasu Kawada, Takahiro Inoue.   

Abstract

The main problem that arises from patient-prosthesis mismatch after aortic valve replacement is a residual high transvalvular pressure gradient, resulting in left ventricular overload. It was demonstrated by Pibarot and Dumesnil that the indexed effective orifice area should be larger than 0.85-0.90 cm2/m2 to prevent any significant transvalvular pressure gradient after operation. However, we have encountered a higher residual transvalvular pressure gradient than expected in some patients with an aortic stented bioprosthesis with an indexed effective orifice area greater than 0.85 cm2/m2. Based on our data, an indexed effective orifice area of less than 1.25 cm2/m2 might be considered the threshold for patient-prosthesis mismatch in patients with a stented bioprosthesis because this indexed effective orifice area is associated with a low mean transvalvular pressure gradient (less than 10 mmHg). The practical implications include the necessity to consider the hemodynamic performance of each prosthesis type when seeking to define patient-prosthesis mismatch and abnormally or significant high postoperative gradients that lead to an increased left ventricular workload, so as to avoid residual significant transvalvular pressure gradients and higher rates of morbidity and mortality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18836879     DOI: 10.1007/s10047-008-0424-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Artif Organs        ISSN: 1434-7229            Impact factor:   1.731


  5 in total

Review 1.  Hemodynamic and clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch in the aortic valve position and its prevention.

Authors:  P Pibarot; J G Dumesnil
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 24.094

2.  Validation and applications of indexed aortic prosthetic valve areas calculated by Doppler echocardiography.

Authors:  J G Dumesnil; G N Honos; M Lemieux; J Beauchemin
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 24.094

3.  Impact of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch on short-term mortality after aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Claudia Blais; Jean G Dumesnil; Richard Baillot; Serge Simard; Daniel Doyle; Philippe Pibarot
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2003-08-11       Impact factor: 29.690

4.  Prosthesis size and long-term survival after aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Eugene H Blackstone; Delos M Cosgrove; W R Eric Jamieson; Nancy J Birkmeyer; John H Lemmer; D Craig Miller; Eric G Butchart; Giulio Rizzoli; Magdi Yacoub; Akiko Chai
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 5.209

5.  Patient prosthesis mismatch is rare after aortic valve replacement: valve size may be irrelevant.

Authors:  Naoji Hanayama; George T Christakis; Hari R Mallidi; Campbell D Joyner; Stephen E Fremes; Christopher D Morgan; Peter R R Mitoff; Bernard S Goldman
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 4.330

  5 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  Journal of Artificial Organs 2008: the year in review.

Authors:  Y Sawa; E Tatsumi; A Funakubo; T Horiuchi; K Iwasaki; A Kishida; T Masuzawa; K Matsuda; M Nishimura; T Nishimura; Y Tomizawa; T Yamaoka; H Watanabe
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2009-03-29       Impact factor: 1.731

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.