BACKGROUND: Various surgical techniques have been proposed to treat small aortic annulus. We have used small-diameter mechanical valves for small aortic annulus. The present study examined aortic valve replacement with small diameter mechanical valves to determine their effectiveness. METHODS: The study included 67 patients who underwent elective, isolated aortic valve replacement with ATS-Advanced Performance (AP) valves (ATS Medical, Inc, Minneapolis, MN) within our department. The patients were divided into two groups; patients receiving the 16-mm AP valve (16-mm group) and those receiving valves 18-mm AP or larger (>16-mm group). RESULTS: The mean age of the 16-mm group was significantly higher than that of the >16-mm group. Body surface area was significantly smaller in the 16-mm group than the >16-mm group. We found no significant differences in preoperative conditions between the groups. The effective orifice area index of the mechanical valve was lower in the 16-mm group (0.87+/-0.06 vs 1.12+/-0.13 cm2/m2, p<0.0001). Six patients (40%) in the 16-mm group fell into the category of prosthesis-patient mismatch cases. Although the postoperative pressure gradient was higher in the 16-mm group (33.7+/-12.5 vs 23.16+/-8.78, p<0.01), left ventricular mass index and left ventricular ejection fraction at early and at late follow-up improved from the preoperative period in both groups. We found no significant differences in incidence of postoperative complications, including death. CONCLUSIONS: We believe aortic valve replacement with small-diameter mechanical valves (the ATS-AP valves) in patients with a small annulus provides satisfactory remote prognosis. The use of mechanical valves in elderly patients is considered acceptable with strict clinical monitoring to prevent thromboembolism and anticoagulation therapy-induced complications. Copyright (c) 2010 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Various surgical techniques have been proposed to treat small aortic annulus. We have used small-diameter mechanical valves for small aortic annulus. The present study examined aortic valve replacement with small diameter mechanical valves to determine their effectiveness. METHODS: The study included 67 patients who underwent elective, isolated aortic valve replacement with ATS-Advanced Performance (AP) valves (ATS Medical, Inc, Minneapolis, MN) within our department. The patients were divided into two groups; patients receiving the 16-mm AP valve (16-mm group) and those receiving valves 18-mm AP or larger (>16-mm group). RESULTS: The mean age of the 16-mm group was significantly higher than that of the >16-mm group. Body surface area was significantly smaller in the 16-mm group than the >16-mm group. We found no significant differences in preoperative conditions between the groups. The effective orifice area index of the mechanical valve was lower in the 16-mm group (0.87+/-0.06 vs 1.12+/-0.13 cm2/m2, p<0.0001). Six patients (40%) in the 16-mm group fell into the category of prosthesis-patient mismatch cases. Although the postoperative pressure gradient was higher in the 16-mm group (33.7+/-12.5 vs 23.16+/-8.78, p<0.01), left ventricular mass index and left ventricular ejection fraction at early and at late follow-up improved from the preoperative period in both groups. We found no significant differences in incidence of postoperative complications, including death. CONCLUSIONS: We believe aortic valve replacement with small-diameter mechanical valves (the ATS-AP valves) in patients with a small annulus provides satisfactory remote prognosis. The use of mechanical valves in elderly patients is considered acceptable with strict clinical monitoring to prevent thromboembolism and anticoagulation therapy-induced complications. Copyright (c) 2010 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.