Aortic valve replacement with sutureless prosthesis: better than root enlargement to avoid patient-prosthesis mismatch?

被引:36
|
作者
Beckmann, Erik [1 ]
Martens, Andreas [1 ]
Alhadi, Firas [1 ]
Hoeffler, Klaus [1 ]
Umminger, Julia [1 ]
Kaufeld, Tim [1 ]
Sarikouch, Samir [1 ]
Koigeldiev, Nurbol [1 ]
Cebotari, Serghei [1 ]
Schmitto, Jan Dieter [1 ]
Haverich, Axel [1 ]
Shrestha, Malakh [1 ]
机构
[1] Hannover Med Sch, Dept Cardiothorac Transplantat & Vasc Surg, Carl Neuberg Str 1, D-30625 Hannover, Germany
关键词
Aortic valve replacement; Patient-prosthesis mismatch; Aortic root enlargement; Sutureless valves; Sorin Perceval; MORBIDITY; MORTALITY; ANNULUS;
D O I
10.1093/icvts/ivw041
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVES: Aortic valve replacement in patients with a small aortic annulus may result in patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM). Aortic root enlargement (ARE) can reduce PPM, but leads to extended cardiac ischaemia times. Sutureless valves have the potential to prevent PPM while reducing cardiac ischaemia times. METHODS: Between January 2007 and December 2011, a total of 128 patients with a small aortic annulus underwent surgery for aortic valve stenosis at our centre. Thirty-six (17% male, n = 6) patients received conventional valve replacement with ARE and 92 (16% male, n = 18) subjects received sutureless valve implantation (Sorin Perceval). We conducted a comparative, retrospective study with follow-up. RESULTS: The sutureless group showed a significantly higher age (79 years) than the ARE patients (62 years, P < 0.001) and received significantly more concomitant cardiac procedures (33%, n = 30 vs 6%, n = 2, P = 0.001). The mean operation, cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times were significantly lower in sutureless patients (147 +/- 42, 67 +/- 26 and 35 +/- 13 min, respectively) than in ARE patients (181 +/- 41, 105 +/- 29 and 70 +/- 19 min, respectively, P < 0.001). The mean postoperative effective orifice area (EOA) indexed to the body surface area was 0.91 +/- 0.2 cm(2)/m(2) in ARE patients and 0.83 +/- 0.14 cm(2)/m(2) in sutureless patients (P = 0.040). The rate of patients with severe PPM was 6% (n = 2) in ARE patients and 11% (n = 8%) in sutureless patients (not significant, n.s.). The 30-day mortality rates were 2% (n = 2) in sutureless patients and 6% (n = 2) in ARE patients (n.s.). The 1- and 5-year survival rates of the sutureless group were 92 and 54% years, respectively, whereas the 1- and 5-year survival rates of the ARE group were 76% (n. s.). CONCLUSIONS: Although the sutureless valve patients received significantly more concomitant procedures, all operation-associated times were significantly shorter. Despite sutureless valve patients being older, the 30-day mortality and survival rates were comparable in the two groups. Since the indexed EOA was only slightly lower and the incidence of severe PPM was not significantly higher in the sutureless valve patients, we conclude that sutureless valve implantation is an alternative to conventional ARE to treat a small aortic annulus and avoid PPM, especially in geriatric patients who benefit from the quick implantation process.
引用
收藏
页码:744 / 749
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch
    Hernandez-Vaquero, Daniel
    Hardin, John
    Llosa, Juan C.
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2012, 94 (06) : 2182 - 2183
  • [32] Stent valve implantation in conventional redo aortic valve surgery to prevent patient-prosthesis mismatch
    Ferrari, Enrico
    Franciosi, Giorgio
    Clivio, Sara
    Faletra, Francesco
    Moccetti, Marco
    Moccetti, Tiziano
    Pedrazzini, Giovanni
    Demertzis, Stefanos
    INTERACTIVE CARDIOVASCULAR AND THORACIC SURGERY, 2017, 24 (03) : 319 - 323
  • [33] Does patient-prosthesis mismatch after aortic valve replacement affect survival and quality of life in elderly patients?
    Sportelli, Elena
    Regesta, Tommaso
    Salsano, Antonio
    Ghione, Paola
    Brega, Carlotta
    Bezante, Gian Paolo
    Passerone, Giancarlo
    Santini, Francesco
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE, 2016, 17 (02) : 137 - 143
  • [34] 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)
  • [35] Overcoming prosthesis-patient mismatch with transcatheter aortic valve replacement
    Grubb, Kendra J.
    Tom, Stephanie K.
    Sultan, Ibrahim
    Sa, Michel Pompeu
    ANNALS OF CARDIOTHORACIC SURGERY, 2024, 13 (03) : 236 - 243
  • [36] Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch in Patients With Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Isolated Aortic Valve Replacement Does Not Affect Survival
    Howell, Neil J.
    Keogh, Bruce E.
    Ray, Daniel
    Bonser, Robert S.
    Graham, Tim R.
    Mascaro, Jorge
    Rooney, Stephen J.
    Wilson, Ian C.
    Pagano, Domenico
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2010, 89 (01) : 60 - 64
  • [37] Impact of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch following Aortic Valve Replacement on Long-Term Survival and Quality of Life
    Hoffmann, Grischa
    Abraham-Westphal, Selam
    Attmann, Tim
    Frank, Derk
    Lutter, Georg
    Cremer, Jochen
    Petzina, Rainer
    THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGEON, 2020, 68 (02) : 124 - 130
  • [38] Patient prosthesis mismatch after aortic valve replacement: An Indian perspective
    Joshi, Shreedhar S.
    Ashwini, T.
    George, Antony
    Jagadeesh, A. M.
    ANNALS OF CARDIAC ANAESTHESIA, 2016, 19 (01) : 84 - 88
  • [39] Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch in Elderly Patients Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement: Impact on Quality of Life and Survival
    Urso, Stefano
    Sadaba, Rafael
    Vives, Manuel
    Trujillo, John
    Beltrame, Sergio
    Soriano, Beatriz
    Piqueras, Lucia
    Aldamiz-Echevarria, Gonzalo
    JOURNAL OF HEART VALVE DISEASE, 2009, 18 (03) : 248 - 255
  • [40] Prosthesis-patient mismatch after aortic valve replacement
    Dahou A.
    Mahjoub H.
    Pibarot P.
    Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2016, 18 (11)