Patient-prosthesis mismatch does not affect survival following aortic valve replacement

被引:70
|
作者
Howell, Neil J. [1 ]
Keogh, Bruce E. [1 ]
Barnet, Vivien [1 ]
Bonser, Robert S. [1 ]
Graham, Timothy R. [1 ]
Rooney, Stephen J. [1 ]
Wilson, Ian C. [1 ]
Pagano, Domenico [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp NHS Fdn Trust, Dept Cardiothorac Surg, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
关键词
aortic valve disease; aortic valve replacement;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejcts.2006.03.046
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective: Patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) has been reported to increase perioperative mortality and reduce postoperative survival in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). We analysed the effect of PPM at values predicting severe mismatch on survival following AVR in our unit. Methods: Prospectively collected data on 1481 consecutive patients who had undergone AVR with or without coronary artery revascularisation between 1997 and 2005 were analysed. Projected in vitro valve effective orifice area (EOA) and geometric prosthesis internal orifice area (GOA) were evaluated and values were indexed to body surface area (cm(2) m(-2)). PPM was defined as EOAi < 0.6 and/or GOAi < 1.1. Long-term survival data were obtained from the National Institute of Statistics. Results: One thousand four hundred and eighteen patients were identified. 67/1418 (4.7%) patients had GOAi < 1.1; 122/1418 (8.6%) had EOAi < 0.6 and 38 (2.6%) patients exhibited both forms of mismatch. One thousand two hundred and sixty-seven patients (89%) demonstrated no mismatch (reference group). There were 75 in-hospital deaths (overall mortality 5.3%) with no significant difference between the mismatch and the reference groups. Survival data were available for up to 8 years (median 36 months, IQR 6-60 months). There were 160 late deaths (13/143 PPM group vs 147/1198 reference group). The 5-year survival estimate was similar for both groups (83% PPM group; 81% reference group; p = 0.47). Cox-hazard analysis identified advanced age as the only predictor of reduced survival (age > 80, RR 2.13, 95% CI 1.38-4.586, p = 0.004). Conclusions: Severe patient-prosthesis mismatch was predicted in 4-10% of patients undergoing AVR but this did not affect in-hospital mortality or mid-term survival. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:10 / 14
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Aortic valve replacement with sutureless prosthesis: better than root enlargement to avoid patient-prosthesis mismatch?
    Beckmann, Erik
    Martens, Andreas
    Alhadi, Firas
    Hoeffler, Klaus
    Umminger, Julia
    Kaufeld, Tim
    Sarikouch, Samir
    Koigeldiev, Nurbol
    Cebotari, Serghei
    Schmitto, Jan Dieter
    Haverich, Axel
    Shrestha, Malakh
    INTERACTIVE CARDIOVASCULAR AND THORACIC SURGERY, 2016, 22 (06) : 744 - 749
  • [42] Patient-prosthesis mismatch after small-size stentless aortic valve replacement
    Gelsomino, S
    Morocutti, G
    Masullo, G
    Da Col, P
    Frassani, R
    Spedicato, L
    Livi, U
    JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, 2004, 19 (02) : 91 - 97
  • [43] Surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement: Impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch on outcomes
    Alnajar, Ahmed
    Hamad, Naser
    Azhar, Muhammad Z.
    Mousa, Yaseen
    Arora, Yingyot
    Lamelas, Joseph
    JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, 2022, 37 (12) : 5388 - 5394
  • [44] Effect of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch on the Hemodynamics and Quality of Life after Aortic Valve Replacement
    Fukunaga, S.
    Ueda, T.
    Mori, R.
    Akasu, K.
    Kosuga, T.
    Tomoeda, H.
    Chihara, S.
    Arinaga, K.
    Aoyagi, S.
    CARDIOLOGY, 2010, 115 (04) : 269 - 269
  • [45] Repeat aortic valve replacement for isolated patient-prosthesis mismatch associated with an excellent short-term survival
    Girard, SE
    Miller, FA
    Edwards, WD
    Tazelaar, HD
    Mahoney, DW
    Malouf, YF
    Tajik, AJ
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2000, 35 (02) : 534A - 534A
  • [46] A Retrospective Analysis of Standardized Gradient Calculations for Evaluating Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch Following Mechanical Aortic Valve Replacement
    Saglam, Muhammet Fethi
    Uguz, Emrah
    Erdogan, Kemal Esref
    Ercelik, Huseyin unsal
    Yucel, Murat
    Alili, Altay
    Elipek, Nur Gizem
    Karaca, Okay Guven
    Sener, Erol
    DIAGNOSTICS, 2025, 15 (05)
  • [47] Patient-prosthesis mismatch: surgical aortic valve replacement versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement in high risk patients with aortic stenosis
    Ghanta, Ravi K.
    Kron, Irving L.
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE, 2016, 8 (10) : E1441 - E1443
  • [48] Patient-prosthesis mismatch after transapical aortic valve implantation
    Kukucka, Marian
    Pasic, Miralem
    Dreysse, Stephan
    Buz, Semih
    Drews, Thorsten
    Mladenow, Alexander
    Habazettl, Helmut
    Kuppe, Hermann
    Unbehaun, Axel
    Hetzer, Roland
    ANNALS OF CARDIOTHORACIC SURGERY, 2012, 1 (02) : 172 - 175
  • [49] Patient-prosthesis mismatch after transapical aortic valve implantation: Incidence and impact on survival
    Kukucka, Marian
    Pasic, Miralem
    Dreysse, Stephan
    Mladenow, Alexander
    Habazettl, Helmut
    Hetzer, Roland
    Unbehaun, Axel
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2013, 145 (02): : 391 - 397
  • [50] Suture Techniques and Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch for Aortic Valve Surgery
    Iscan, Sahin
    Eygi, Bortecin
    Yesilkaya, Nihan
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2020, 110 (05): : 1781 - 1781