Impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch and aortic valve design on coronary flow reserve after aortic valve replacement

被引:54
|
作者
Bakhtiary, Farhad
Schiemann, Mirko
Dzemali, Omer
Dogan, Selami
Schaechinger, Volker
Ackermann, Hans
Moritz, Anton
Kleine, Peter
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Frankfurt, Dept Thorac & Cardiovasc Surg, D-60596 Frankfurt, Germany
[2] Univ Hosp Frankfurt, Dept Diagnost & Intervent Radiol, D-60596 Frankfurt, Germany
[3] Univ Hosp Frankfurt, Dept Cardiol & Electrophysiol, D-60596 Frankfurt, Germany
[4] Univ Hosp Frankfurt, Dept Biomed Stat, D-60596 Frankfurt, Germany
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.jacc.2006.10.052
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives This prospective-randomized study investigated the effect of aortic valve design and patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) on coronary flow reserve (CFR) after mechanical or biological aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with aortic stenosis (AS). Background Coronary flow reserve may be an important parameter of long-term survival after AVR in patients with AS. Reduced CFR may contribute to more cardiovascular events and greater rates of mortality. Methods A total of 48 patients undergoing AVR underwent magnetic resonance imaging for the measurement of coronary flow preoperatively, 5 days postoperatively, and at 6-month follow-up with measurement of CFR. Patients scheduled for mechanical AVR were randomized to a tilting disc or bileaflet prosthesis (n = 12 in each group). For biological AVR, patients were scheduled to receive a stented (n = 12) or stentless (n = 12) valve. Patients also underwent echocardiography with measurement of transvalvular pressure gradients and left ventricular mass regression. Results Postoperatively, coronary flow increased significantly in all groups (p < 0.001). Only stentless valves demonstrated a normal CFR (3.4 +/- 0.3 vs. 2.3 +/- 0.1 for stented biological valves, 2.1 +/- 0.2 for tilting disc, and 2.2 0.3 for bileaflet mechanical valves). Patient-prosthesis mismatch with an indexed effective orifice area < 0.85 cm(2)/m(2) led to decreased rates of CFR in the tilting disc, stentless, and stented groups. Pressure gradients were 14 +/- 3 mm Hg for tilting disc, 12 4 mm Hg for bileaflet, 19 +/- 6 mm Hg for stented, and 10 +/- 4 mm Hg for stentless valves. Conclusions Normalization of CFR after AVR in patients with AS was observed only for stentless valves. Coronary flow reserve might explain the excellent long-term results for stentless valves.
引用
收藏
页码:790 / 796
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Patient-prosthesis mismatch after aortic valve replacement in the elderly
    Ryomoto M.
    Mitsuno M.
    Yamamura M.
    Tanaka H.
    Kobayashi Y.
    Fukui S.
    Tsujiya N.
    Kajiyama T.
    Miyamoto Y.
    General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2008, 56 (7) : 330 - 334
  • [2] Patient-prosthesis mismatch following aortic valve replacement
    Bilkhu, Rajdeep
    Jahangiri, Marjan
    Otto, Catherine M.
    HEART, 2019, 105 : S28 - S33
  • [3] Patient-prosthesis mismatch in patients with aortic valve replacement
    Kaminishi Y.
    Misawa Y.
    Kobayashi J.
    Konishi H.
    Miyata H.
    Motomura N.
    Takamoto S.-I.
    General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2013, 61 (5) : 274 - 279
  • [4] Patient-prosthesis mismatch after minimally invasive aortic valve replacement
    Filip, Grzegorz
    Litwinowicz, Radoslaw
    Kapelak, Boguslaw
    Bryndza, Magdalena
    Bartus, Magdalena
    Konstanty-Kalandyk, Janusz
    Ceranowicz, Piotr
    Brzezinski, Maciej
    Gafoor, Sameer
    Bartus, Krzysztof
    KARDIOLOGIA POLSKA, 2018, 76 (05) : 908 - 910
  • [5] Patient-prosthesis mismatch affects survival after aortic valve replacement
    Rao, V
    Jamieson, WRE
    Ivanov, J
    Armstrong, S
    David, TE
    CIRCULATION, 1999, 100 (18) : 461 - 461
  • [6] Clinical Impact of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch After Aortic Valve Replacement With a Mechanical or Biological Prosthesis
    Matkovic, Milos
    Aleksic, Nemanja
    Bilbija, Ilija
    Antic, Ana
    Lazovic, Jelena Milin
    Cubrilo, Marko
    Milojevic, Aleksandar
    Zivkovic, Igor
    Putnik, Svetozar
    TEXAS HEART INSTITUTE JOURNAL, 2023, 50 (05)
  • [7] Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch After Aortic Valve Intervention Another Win for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
    Prendergast, Bernard D.
    McConkey, Hannah Z. R.
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2018, 11 (08) : 781 - 783
  • [8] Moderate patient-prosthesis mismatch can impact on mortality after aortic valve replacement
    Dumesnil, J. G.
    Magne, J.
    Girerd, N.
    HEART, 2009, 95 (07) : 592 - 592
  • [9] PATIENT-PROSTHESIS MISMATCH IMPACT ON PATIENT QUALITY OF LIFE AFTER CONVENTIONAL AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT
    Stradins, P.
    Meidrops, K.
    Prozorovskis, E.
    ATHEROSCLEROSIS, 2019, 287 : E154 - E154
  • [10] Patient-prosthesis mismatch in aortic valve replacement:: really tolerable?
    Fuster, RG
    Argudo, JAM
    Albarova, OG
    Sos, FH
    López, SC
    Codoñer, MB
    Miñano, JAB
    Albarran, IR
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIO-THORACIC SURGERY, 2005, 27 (03) : 441 - 449