Prosthesis-patient mismatch is not clinically relevant in aortic valve replacement using the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount valve

被引:49
作者
Flameng, Willem
Meuris, Bart
Herijgers, Paul
Herregods, Marie-Christine
机构
[1] Univ Clin Gasthuisberg, Dept Cardiac Surg, B-3000 Louvain, Belgium
[2] Univ Clin Gasthuisberg, Dept Cardiol, B-3000 Louvain, Belgium
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.athoracsur.2006.03.089
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background. Previous studies have shown that prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) results in higher early and late mortality after bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement. Careful selection of stented bioprostheses was recommended to avoid inadequate effective orifice area. We studied the incidence of PPM and its potential effects on clinical outcome in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement using the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount bioprosthesis. Methods. Independent predictors of early and late mortality and hospital readmission for cardiac reasons were defined in 506 patients (mean age, 73 years; range, 57 to 87 years) by multivariate analysis. Mean follow-up was 6.1 +/- 4.8 years; maximum follow-up was 18.6 years. Results. The incidence of severe PPM (effective orifice area index < 0.65 cm(2)/m(2)) was 0.2% and of moderate PPM (effective orifice area index > 0.65 and < 0.85) was 20%. Multivariate analysis revealed that moderate PPM was not an independent predictor of early mortality, late mortality, or hospital readmission for cardiac reasons. Reduction of septal hypertrophy was similar in patients with and without moderate PPM. Conclusions. The incidence of severe PPM is virtually nonexistent after aortic valve replacement using the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount valve. Moderate PPM is found in 20% of cases and is clinically irrelevant in this population.
引用
收藏
页码:530 / 536
页数:7
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2003, CARDIAC SURG TODAY
[2]   Prosthesis size and long-term survival after aortic valve replacement [J].
Blackstone, EH ;
Cosgrove, DM ;
Jamieson, WRE ;
Birkmeyer, NJ ;
Lemmer, JH ;
Miller, DC ;
Butchart, EG ;
Rizzoli, G ;
Yacoub, M ;
Chai, AK .
JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2003, 126 (03) :783-796
[3]   Impact of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch on short-term mortality after aortic valve replacement [J].
Blais, C ;
Dumesnil, JG ;
Baillot, R ;
Simard, S ;
Doyle, D ;
Pibarot, P .
CIRCULATION, 2003, 108 (08) :983-988
[4]   Guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease - Executive summary - A report of the American College of Cardiology American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines (committee on management of patients with valvular heart disease) [J].
Bonow, RO ;
Carabello, B ;
de Leon, AC ;
Edmunds, LH ;
Fedderly, BJ ;
Freed, MD ;
Gaasch, WH ;
McKay, CR ;
Nishimura, RA ;
O'Gara, PT ;
O'Rourke, RA ;
Rahimtoola, SH ;
Ritchie, JL ;
Cheitlin, MD ;
Eagle, KA ;
Gardner, TJ ;
Garson, A ;
Gibbons, RJ ;
Russell, RO ;
Ryan, TJ ;
Smith, SC .
CIRCULATION, 1998, 98 (18) :1949-1984
[5]   VALIDATION AND APPLICATIONS OF INDEXED AORTIC PROSTHETIC VALVE AREAS CALCULATED BY DOPPLER ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY [J].
DUMESNIL, JG ;
HONOS, GN ;
LEMIEUX, M ;
BEAUCHEMIN, J .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 1990, 16 (03) :637-643
[6]  
Flameng W, 1997, J HEART VALVE DIS, V6, P269
[7]   Prosthesis-patient size: Measurement and clinical implications [J].
Gillinov, AM ;
Blackstone, EH ;
Rodriguez, LL .
JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2003, 126 (02) :313-316
[8]   Patient prosthesis mismatch is rare after aortic valve replacement: Valve size may be irrelevant - Discussion [J].
Olinger, GN ;
Christakis, GT .
ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2002, 73 (06) :1829-1829
[9]   Patient-prosthesis mismatch is negligible with modern small-size aortic valve prostheses [J].
Izzat, MB ;
Kadir, I ;
Reeves, B ;
Wilde, P ;
Bryan, AJ ;
Angelini, GD .
ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 1999, 68 (05) :1657-1660
[10]   Hemodynamic and clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch in the aortic valve position and its prevention [J].
Pibarot, P ;
Dumesnil, JG .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2000, 36 (04) :1131-1141