PURPOSE: The effective orifice area index (EOAI) is used to define the prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) after aortic valve replacement (AVR). However, few studies have so far evaluated whether the cutoff value for PPM varies across prostheses. This study assessed the hemodynamics in patients given a mechanical valve and then re-evaluated the validity of the commonly accepted threshold. METHODS: The subjects included 329 patients that underwent AVR with a St. Jude Medical Regent valve. The transvalvular pressure gradient and EOAI were determined echocardiographically, and the commonly accepted threshold was analyzed in relation to survival. RESULTS: The mechanical valves very often yielded a postoperative transvalvular pressure gradient >10 mmHg, and thus, clinically significant residual pressure, regardless of the EOAI. The slope of the curve describing the relationship between the transvalvular pressure gradient and EOAI was gentler than that reported for bioprosthetic valves, for which the pressure gradient rises sharply at EOAI <0.85 cm(2)/m(2). The commonly defined PPM did not affect the long-term survival or regression of the left ventricular mass index. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between the transvalvular pressure gradient and the EOAI in patients given a mechanical prosthesis differed from the reference standard. These data suggest the need to reconsider the appropriate cutoff value for PPM in relation to different prostheses.
PURPOSE: The effective orifice area index (EOAI) is used to define the prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) after aortic valve replacement (AVR). However, few studies have so far evaluated whether the cutoff value for PPM varies across prostheses. This study assessed the hemodynamics in patients given a mechanical valve and then re-evaluated the validity of the commonly accepted threshold. METHODS: The subjects included 329 patients that underwent AVR with a St. Jude Medical Regent valve. The transvalvular pressure gradient and EOAI were determined echocardiographically, and the commonly accepted threshold was analyzed in relation to survival. RESULTS: The mechanical valves very often yielded a postoperative transvalvular pressure gradient >10 mmHg, and thus, clinically significant residual pressure, regardless of the EOAI. The slope of the curve describing the relationship between the transvalvular pressure gradient and EOAI was gentler than that reported for bioprosthetic valves, for which the pressure gradient rises sharply at EOAI <0.85 cm(2)/m(2). The commonly defined PPM did not affect the long-term survival or regression of the left ventricular mass index. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between the transvalvular pressure gradient and the EOAI in patients given a mechanical prosthesis differed from the reference standard. These data suggest the need to reconsider the appropriate cutoff value for PPM in relation to different prostheses.
Authors: K Hirooka; K Kawazoe; Y Kosakai; Y Sasako; K Eishi; Y Kito; N Nakanishi; T Yoshioka; Y Kawashima Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 1994-12 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: J R González-Juanatey; J M García-Acuña; M Vega Fernandez; A Amaro Cendón; V Castelo Fuentes; J B García-Bengoechea; M G de la Peña Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 1996-08 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Marc R Moon; Jennifer S Lawton; Nader Moazami; Nabil A Munfakh; Michael K Pasque; Ralph J Damiano Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2008-12-19 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: María José Dalmau; José María González-Santos; Javier López-Rodríguez; María Bueno; Antonio Arribas; Félix Nieto Journal: Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg Date: 2007-03-28
Authors: Dania Mohty; Jean G Dumesnil; Najmeddine Echahidi; Patrick Mathieu; François Dagenais; Pierre Voisine; Philippe Pibarot Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2009-01-06 Impact factor: 24.094