Literature DB >> 23160858

Mid-term results of small-sized St. Jude Medical Regent prosthetic valves (21 mm or less) for small aortic annulus.

Hiroki Mizoguchi1, Masayuki Sakaki, Kazushige Inoue, Takashi Iwata, Keikou Tei, Takuya Miura.   

Abstract

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) is always of concern when performing aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with a small aortic annulus. Although bioprosthetic AVR is preferred in patients older than 65 years, we have experienced cases in elderly patients with a small aortic annulus whereby we could not implant small-sized bioprosthetic valves. We have implanted St. Jude Medical Regent (SJMR) mechanical valves (St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN, USA) as necessary, even in elderly patients with no aortic annulus enlargement. We investigated our experiences of AVR with SJMR mechanical valves of 21 mm or less in size. Between January 2006 and December 2009, 40 patients underwent AVR with SJMR mechanical valves ≤21 mm in size: 9 patients received 21-mm valves, 19 received 19-mm valves, and 12 received 17-mm valves. The mean age was 65.9 ± 9.5 years, and 25 patients (62.5 %) were 65 years or older. We evaluated the clinical outcome and the echocardiographic data for each valve size. There was no operative or hospital mortality. The mean duration of clinical follow-up was 31.2 ± 17.6 months. During follow-up, there were no hospitalizations due to heart failure. The cumulative valve-related event-free survival was 93 % at 33 months, and the cumulative hemorrhagic event-free survival was 93 % at 33 months and 84 % at 43 months, using the Kaplan-Meier method. At follow-up, the mean values of the measured effective orifice area (EOA) for the 21-, 19-, and 17-mm prostheses were 2.00 ± 0.22, 1.74 ± 0.37, and 1.25 ± 0.26 cm(2), and the mean measured EOA index (EOAI) were 1.17 ± 0.12, 1.11 ± 0.21 and 0.90 ± 0.22 cm(2)/m(2), respectively. A PPM (EOAI ≤0.85) was documented in 5 patients, all of whom had received a 17-mm SJMR valve. AVR with SJMR valves of 21 mm or less in size appears to show satisfactory clinical and hemodynamic results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23160858     DOI: 10.1007/s00380-012-0306-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart Vessels        ISSN: 0910-8327            Impact factor:   2.037


  26 in total

1.  A comparison of the hinge and near-hinge flow fields of the St Jude medical hemodynamic plus and regent bileaflet mechanical heart valves.

Authors:  J T Ellis; A P Yoganathan
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 5.209

2.  Aortic root enlargement: worth the effort?

Authors:  Alexander Kulik
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.330

3.  Recommendations for chamber quantification: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography's Guidelines and Standards Committee and the Chamber Quantification Writing Group, developed in conjunction with the European Association of Echocardiography, a branch of the European Society of Cardiology.

Authors:  Roberto M Lang; Michelle Bierig; Richard B Devereux; Frank A Flachskampf; Elyse Foster; Patricia A Pellikka; Michael H Picard; Mary J Roman; James Seward; Jack S Shanewise; Scott D Solomon; Kirk T Spencer; Martin St John Sutton; William J Stewart
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 5.251

4.  Aortic valve replacement with patch enlargement of the aortic annulus.

Authors:  K E Sommers; T E David
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 4.330

5.  Standard aortic St. Jude valve at 18 years: performance profile and determinants of outcome.

Authors:  O Lund; S L Nielsen; H Arildsen; L B Ilkjaer; H K Pilegaard
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.330

6.  Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass in the Framingham Heart Study.

Authors:  D Levy; R J Garrison; D D Savage; W B Kannel; W P Castelli
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1990-05-31       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Patient-prosthesis mismatch can be predicted at the time of operation.

Authors:  P Pibarot; J G Dumesnil; P C Cartier; J Métras; M D Lemieux
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 4.330

8.  Performance of stentless versus stented aortic valve bioprostheses in the elderly patient: a prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  M Doss; S Martens; J P Wood; T Aybek; P Kleine; G Wimmer Greinecker; A Moritz
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 4.191

9.  Enlargement of the small aortic root during aortic valve replacement: is there a benefit?

Authors:  Alexander Kulik; Manal Al-Saigh; Vincent Chan; Roy G Masters; Pierre Bédard; B-Khanh Lam; Fraser D Rubens; Paul J Hendry; Thierry G Mesana; Marc Ruel
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 4.330

10.  Aortic annular enlargement during aortic valve replacement: improving results with time.

Authors:  Mark D Peterson; Michael A Borger; Christopher M Feindel; Tirone E David
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 4.330

View more
  3 in total

1.  Late clinical outcomes after mechanical aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: old versus new prostheses.

Authors:  Heemoon Lee; Kiick Sung; Wook Sung Kim; Dong Seop Jeong; Joong Hyun Ahn; Keumhee Chough Carriere; Pyo Won Park
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 2.  Prosthesis-patient mismatch - what cardiac anesthesiologists need to know?

Authors:  Kathirvel Subramaniam; Soheyla Nazarnia
Journal:  Ann Card Anaesth       Date:  2017 Apr-Jun

3.  Seventeen-millimeter St. Jude Medical Regent valve in patients with small aortic annulus: dose moderate prosthesis-patient mismatch matter?

Authors:  Jia Hu; Hong Qian; Ya-jiao Li; Jun Gu; Jing Janice Zhao; Er-yong Zhang
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2014-01-17       Impact factor: 1.637

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.