Small Prosthesis Size in Aortic Valve Replacement Does Not Affect Mortality (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2007
Supplemental material is available online. Objectives: The appropriate index of prosthesis internal orifice size and its effect on operative mortality after aortic valve replacement are controversial. We examined the association between several relevant indices and patient size on operative mortality. Indices examined included projected in vivo effective orifice area and geometric orifice area, with patient size defined as body surface area. Methods: A review of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Cardiac Database (2000-2004) yielded 48,722 patients who had isolated aortic valve replacement. This analysis is based on the cohort of 42,310 patients with the 8 most prevalent valve types with manufacturer's labeled sizes 19 mm through 29 mm. Multivariable logistic regression models were employed to determine the effects of body surface area, effective orifice area, geometric orifice area, and selected derived indices (eg, effective orifice area/body surface area) on risk-adjusted operative mortality. Results: In separate multivariable models, effective orifice area and geometric orifice area were both inversely correlated with operative mortality. However, an unanticipated finding was that with either effective orifice area or geometric orifice area held constant, body surface area was significantly and inversely correlated with operative mortality. When patients were stratified by effective orifice area, geometric orifice area, or manufacturer's labeled valve size and type, elevations in body surface area were associated with a decrease rather than an increase in operative mortality. Conclusions: Prostheses with small geometric orifice area or small effective orifice area are associated with increased operative mortality after isolated aortic valve replacement. Even for valves with small effective orifice area, however, mortality decreases as body surface area increases. With respect to operative mortality, therefore, our results do not support using arbitrary cutoff values of effective orifice area/body surface area to determine the valve to utilize in a given patient.
The Heart Surgery Forum, 2014
Background: Small aortic prosthesis can lead to prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM). Implanting such small prosthesis remains a controversial issue. This study was done to investigate whether or not PPM causes an increased operative mortality in aortic valve replacement (AVR).Methods: Two-hundred-two consecutive patients undergoing primary AVR in a tertiary hospital were included. The sample was grouped according to the aortic valve prosthesis size: ?21 mm (small) and >21 mm (standard). The effect of variables on outcomes was determined by univariate and multivariable regression analyses.Results: PPM was found significantly more among patients with AVR ? 21mm (P < 0.0001). Moreover, the likelihood of mortality also was significantly higher in these patients (P < 0.0001). Univariate analysis demonstrated small prosthesis size, urgent operation, PPM, female gender, and NYHA Class IV as significant predictors of mortality. Multivariate regression identified female gender, PPM, a...
Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2021
Background: The long-term performance of prostheses in the small aortic root is still unclear. Methods: Patients who received a 21 mm or smaller aortic valve between 2000–2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Propensity matching was used in order to account for baseline differences in 19 mm vs. 21 mm valve subgroups. Results: Survival at 10 years was 55.87 ± 5.54% for 19 mm valves vs. 57.17 ± 2.82% for 21 mm ones in the original cohort (p = 0.37), and 58.69 ± 5.61% in 19 mm valve recipients vs. 53.60 ± 5.66% for 21 mm valve subgroups in the matched cohort (p = 0.55). Smaller valves exhibited significantly more patient–prothesis mismatch (PPM) than larger ones (87.30% vs. 57.94%, p < 0.01). All-cause mortality was affected by PPM at 10 years (52.66 ± 3.28% vs. 64.38 ± 3.87%, p = 0.04) in the unmatched population. This difference disappeared, however, after matching: survival at 10 years was 51.82 ± 5.26% in patients with PPM and 63.12 ± 6.43% in patients without PPM. (p = 0.14) Conc...
Global Journal of Health Science, 2014
We hypothesized that gender, age, aortic root dimension, blood group and Left Ventricular End Diastolic and Systolic Diameters may have a significant correlation with the size of mechanical valve used. Methods: We included 48 patients retrospectively who had been operated at a single tertiary hospital. All patients with aortic stenosis or regurgitation were included in the study. Patients who had undergone previous cardiac surgery or concomitant surgical procedures, such as coronary artery bypass grafting, were excluded from the study. Results: The median size of the valves used in males (23mm) and females (21mm) were significantly different (P = 0.001). Size of the valve used was significantly associated with Left Ventricular End Systolic Diameter (LVESD) (r = 0.327, P = 0.007) and aortic root dimension (r = 0.526, P < 0.001). Moreover, significantly higher values of LVESD were observed in the expired patients (P = 0.023). Conclusion: This study shows that aortic root dimension and gender may be important predictors for the size of the prosthetic aortic valve used in aortic valve replacement. Our study also concludes that LVESD has significant relationship with in-hospital mortality. However, more long term clinical trials should be conducted to confirm these relationships.
The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 2002
comparison at long-term follow-up Clinical outcome in patients with 19-mm and 21-mm St. Jude aortic prostheses: http://ats.ctsnetjournals.org/cgi/content/full/73/1/37 on the World Wide Web at: The online version of this article, along with updated information and services, is located Print ISSN: 0003-4975; eISSN: 1552-6259. Southern Thoracic Surgical Association. Background. Small-sized prostheses for aortic valve replacement may result in residual left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. Aim of the study was to verify whether implantation of 19-mm versus 21-mm St. Jude Medical standard prostheses (St. Jude Medical, Inc, St. Paul, MN) influences long-term clinical outcome.
Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery, 2016
Introduction: Replacement of the aortic valve in patients with a small aortic annulus is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. A prosthesis-patient mismatch is one of the main problems associated with failed valves in this patient population. Objective: To evaluate the long-term mortality predictors in patients with a small aortic annulus undergoing aortic valve replacement with a bioprosthesis. Methods: In this retrospective observational study, a total of 101 patients undergoing aortic valve replacement from January 2000 to December 2010 were studied. There were 81 (80.19%) women with a mean age of 52.81±18.4 years. Severe aortic stenosis was the main indication for surgery in 54 (53.4%) patients. Posterior annulus enlargement was performed in 16 (15.8%) patients. Overall, 54 (53.41%) patients underwent concomitant surgery: 28 (27.5%) underwent mitral valve replacement, and 13 (12.7%) underwent coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Results: Mean valve index was 0.82±0.08 cm²/m 2. Overall, 17 (16.83%) patients had a valve index lower than 0.75 cm²/m 2 , without statistical significance for mortality (P=0.12). The overall 10-year survival rate was 83.17%. The rate for patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement was 91.3% and 73.1% (P=0.02) for patients who underwent concomitant surgery. In the univariate analysis, the main predictors of mortality were preoperative ejection fraction (P=0.02; HR 0.01) and EuroSCORE II results (P=0.00000042; HR 1.13). In the multivariate analysis, the main predictors of mortality were age (P=0.01, HR 1.04) and concomitant surgery (P=0.01, HR 5.04). Those relationships were statistically significant. Conclusion: A valve index of < 0.75 cm²/m 2 did not affect 10-year survival. However, concomitant surgery and age significantly affected mortality.
General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2016
Objective The treatment strategy for aortic stenosis (AS) has been changing due to newly developed valvular prostheses and trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). To determine the role of new modalities for AS with a small aortic root, papers using the concept of prosthesispatient mismatch (PPM) were reviewed. Methods First, to determine the cutoff value of the indexed effective orifice area (IEOA) for defining PPM, the studies of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with a follow-up longer than 5 years and a patient number larger than 500 were reviewed. Second, the papers comparing TAVI and SAVR were reviewed. Furthermore, the prevalence of PPM was reviewed, with the addition of papers on aortic root enlargement, sutureless AVR, and aortic valve reconstruction with autologous pericardium. Results and conclusion The results of the long-term survival after aortic valve replacement (AVR) have indicated that an IEOA less than 0.65 cm 2 /m 2 should be avoided in all cases, whereas the indications for patients with an IEOA between 065 and 0.85 cm 2 /m 2 should be determined by considering multiple factors. A large body size and younger age have a significantly negative influence on the long-term survival. In Asian population, the prevalence of PPM was low, despite the fact that the size of the aortic annulus was small. The IEOA after TAVI was larger than after surgical AVR in population-matched studies. To evaluate the role of TAVI and other modalities for a small aortic root, studies with a longer follow-up and larger volume are thus warranted.