Hemodynamic Comparison of Bioprostheses for Complete Supra-Annular Position in Patients With Small Aortic Annulus

Impact of Annulus Size on Bioprosthetic Valve Failure after Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valves Replacement

There is limited evidence on the prognosis and long-term valve durability after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with small aortic annulus (SAA) and large aortic annulus (LAA). This analysis was sought to evaluate the impact of annular size differences on patients' and valve outcomes. A total of 1,211 patients undergoing TAVR using self-expandable transcatheter heart valve (SE-THV) were retrospectively analyzed. The cut-off for SAA was defined as annulus perimeter of < 72 mm. The primary endpoints were all-cause mortality and bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF) between the SAA and LAA groups. As a sub-analysis, the impact of postprocedural mean pressure gradient (mPG) ≥ 20mmHg and severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) on these outcomes were also evaluated. Of all patients, 60.1% (n = 723) had SAA. At 7 years after TAVR, the SAA group had lower incidence of all-cause mortality (53.7% vs 63.7%, log-rank p = 0.05) and lower event rate of BVF than LAA (1.2% vs 4.6%, p = 0.01 for Gray's test). Multivariate Cox-regression and Fine-Gray competing risk regression analysis demonstrated the presence of SAA was related to better prognosis (Hazard ratio [HR]: 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67 to 0.98) and lower BVF (adjusted subdistribution HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.98). There were no impact of postprocedural mPG ≥ 20 mmHg or severe PPM on the difference of mortality and BVF. Further, these results were consistent in the patients with SAAs. In conclusion, SAA had better long-term patients' prognosis and valve durability after TAVR with SE-THV.

Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch after Aortic Valve Replacement with the Mosaic Ultra Bioprosthesis

BACKGROUND

 Several studies have reported high rates of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with the Mosaic prosthesis. This work assesses the incidence of PPM after AVR with a modified version of the Mosaic prosthesis, the Mosaic Ultra.

METHODS

 We performed a retrospective analysis of the data of 532 patients who underwent AVR with implantation of the Mosaic Ultra prosthesis in the period 2007-2016 in our institution. Patients were classified according to their indexed effective orifice area (EOAi) to severe (EOAi < 0.65 cm2/m2), moderate (EOAi 0.65-0.85 cm2/m2), and absent/mild PPM (EOAi > 0.85 cm2/m2). In-hospital postoperative outcomes and the impact of PPM on mean transvalvular pressure gradient after stratification by prosthesis size were assessed.

RESULTS

 Overall, 3 (0.6%) patients had severe, 92 (17.3%) moderate, and 437 (82.1%) absent/mild PPM. There was a significant difference in PPM proportions (moderate/severe vs absent/mild PPM) across different prosthesis sizes overall (p < 0.0001), observing gradually increasing rates of PPM with decreasing prosthesis sizes. Patients with moderate/severe PPM had higher mean transvalvular pressure gradients (19 [13-25] vs 13 [10-17] mm Hg, p < 0.0001) than patients with absent/mild PPM. There was a significant difference in mean transvalvular pressure gradient between the different aortic valve prosthesis sizes overall (p < 0.0001), observing gradually increasing gradients with decreasing prosthesis sizes.

CONCLUSION

 Patients undergoing AVR with the smaller sized (19, 21, and 23 mm) Mosaic Ultra aortic valve prostheses exhibit a higher risk for moderate/severe PPM and higher mean aortic transvalvular pressure gradients than patients receiving the larger sized (25, 27, and 29 mm) prostheses.

Are small-sized mechanical valves adequate for patients with small aortic roots?

AIM

Concerns have been raised over patient outcomes following implantation of small aortic valves (size: 19 and 17 mm). However, in patients with a smaller body surface area, these valves may be adequate. The aim of th study was to assess the hemodynamic and functional performance of these valves and their impact on clinical outcomes in patients with a small aortic root.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a prospective observational study that included all consecutive patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) with a small-sized aortic valve over a 3-year period. Patients were followed up at 1 week, 6 weeks, and 1 year. Functional and clinical evaluation along with echocardiography was carried out for hemodynamic assessment. In-hospital mortality and hemodynamic outcomes at 1-year follow-up were recorded.

RESULTS

Isolated AVR with a size 17 mm valve was carried out in 15 (25%) and with a 19 mm valve in 45 (75%) patients. The mean annular size was 19.12 ± 2.03 mm. The mean indexed effective orifice area was 1.08 ± 0.16 cm²/m². Satisfactory decrease in peak and mean trans-prosthetic gradient were evident (peak gradient preoperatively was 92.15 ± 26.2 mmHg, and 25.68 ± 12.28 mmHg at 1 year, mean gradient was 55.31 ± 17.41 mmHg preoperatively and 13.71 ± 7.39 mmHg at 1 year). The functional status of patients also showed significant improvement post AVR. Left ventricular ejection fraction pre-operatively was 59.67% ± 10.38% and 59.57% ± 7.98% at 1-week, 59.15% ± 8.17% at 6 weeks, and 59.59% ± 7.48% at 1 year.

CONCLUSION

When confronted with a small aortic root, AVR with a small-sized prosthesis provides a satisfactory hemodynamic and functional outcome. In patients with small body surface area, implantation of a small-sized valve is a viable option.

Orifice areas of balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves: a three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography study

INTRODUCTION

Accurate expected effective orifice area (EOA) values for balloon-expandable (BE) transcatheter heart valves (THV) are crucial for preventing patient prosthesis mismatch (PPM) and assessment of THV function. Currently published reference EOAs, however, are based on transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) which may be subject to left ventricular outflow tract diameter underestimation and/or suboptimal THV Doppler interrogation. The objective of this study was to establish reference EOA values for BE THVs based on Doppler and three-dimensional (3D) transesophageal echocardiography (TEE).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 212 intra-procedural TEEs performed during BE THV implantation with optimal post-implant Doppler and 3D imaging. We compared continuity equation-derived EOAs to geometric orifice areas by 3D-planimetry (GOA_3D). Performance indices (i.e., EOA normalized to valve size) and PPM rates were determined. TTE-based EOAs performed within 30 days were also calculated in a subset of 170 patients.

RESULTS

The average EOA for all BE THV valves (77% Sapien 3) was 2.3 cm² ± 0.5, while the average EOA was 1.6 ± 0.2 cm² for 20 mm, 2.0 ± 0.2 cm² for 23 mm, 2.5 ± 0.3 cm² for 26 mm and 3.0 ± 0.3 cm² for 29 mm THV size (p<0.001). Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated very good agreement between EOA and GOA_3D (bias -0.04 ± 0.15 cm²). There was a strong correlation between annular area and TEE-based EOA (R=0.84) and GOA_3D (R=0.87). The mean performance index was 47 ± 5% and was similar for all THV sizes (p=0.21). EOAs based on TTE were smaller compared to TEE, while the correlation with annular area (R=0.67) and agreement with GOA_3D (bias -0.26 ± 0.43 cm²) was not as strong. The overall PPM rate was 2% in the TEE cohort and 12% in the TTE cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective orifice areas for BE THVs based on intra-procedural Doppler and 3D-TEE suggest that previously published TTE-based reference values for EOA are underestimated while PPM rates may be overestimated. Our findings have important clinical implications for pre-implant decision making and for the evaluation of THV hemodynamics and function during follow-up.

Aortic valve neocuspidization with autologous pericardium in adult patients: UK experience and meta-analytic comparison with other aortic valve substitutes

OBJECTIVES

We sought to provide further evidence on the safety and efficacy of aortic valve neocuspidization (AVNeo) using autologous pericardium in adult patients with aortic valve disease by reporting clinical and echocardiographic results from the first UK experience and performing a meta-analytic comparison with other biological valve substitutes.

METHODS

We reported clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of 55 patients (mean age 58 ± 15 years) undergoing AVNeo with autologous pericardium in 2 UK centres from 2018 to 2020. These results were included in a meta-analytic comparison between series on AVNeo (7 studies, 1205 patients, mean weighted follow-up 3.6 years) versus Trifecta (10 studies, 8705 patients, 3.8 years), Magna Ease (3 studies, 3137 patients, 4.1 years), Freedom Solo (4 studies, 1869 patients, 4.4 years), Freestyle (4 studies, 4307 patients, 7 years), Mitroflow (4 studies, 4760 patients, 4.1 years) and autograft aortic valve (7 papers, 3839 patients, 9.1 years).

RESULTS

In the present series no patients required intraoperative conversion. After mean follow-up of 12.5 ± 0.9 months, 3 patients presented with endocarditis and 1 required reintervention. The remaining patients had absent or mild aortic valve insufficiency with very low peak and mean transvalvular gradients (16 ± 3.7 and 9 ± 2.2 mmHg, respectively). Meta-analytic estimates showed non-significant difference between AVNeo and all but Magna Ease valves with regards to structural valve degeneration, reintervention and endocarditis. When compared Magna Ease valve, AVNeo and other valve substitutes showed an excess of valve-related events.

CONCLUSIONS

AVNeo is safe, associated with excellent haemodynamic profile. Its midterm risk of valve-related events is comparable to most biological valve substitutes. Magna Ease is potentially the best biological choice as far as risk of reintervention is concerned.

Surgical aortic valve replacement in small aortic annulus

BACKGROUND

Although aortic valve replacement (AVR) has been the standard of treatment for severe aortic stenosis, a small aortic annulus (SAA) poses significant challenges. Improvements in valve designs and evolution in surgical techniques have led to improved outcomes, however, the ideal prosthetic valve remains elusive.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature review to discuss the surgical management of aortic stenosis, with a special focus on patients with SAA.

RESULTS

Stentless valves and root replacement techniques have been shown to overcome the hemodynamic challenges associated with conventional stented bioprostheses, but are technically challenging and require longer cross-clamp times. Sutureless and rapid deployment valves mitigate the long operative time while maintaining the hemodynamic advantages. The use of transcatheter AVR has emerged as another reasonable alternative and has shown promise among patients with SAA, however, long-term outcomes are awaited.

CONCLUSION

There is no consensus regarding the type of valve prosthesis or replacement technique among patients with SAA. Consideration of patient comorbidities and valvular anatomy is paramount in planning the optimal strategy for AVR. Further long-term clinical trials are necessary to assess outcomes and achieve progress toward the development of the ideal prosthesis.

Prosthesis-patient mismatch after surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis

OBJECTIVES

The issue of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has been a controversial topic. We sought to evaluate the long-term clinical impacts of PPM in patients undergoing SAVR in an updated, homogeneous cohort.

METHODS

Using the prospective institutional database, we identified 895 adult patients (median age 66, interquartile range 58-72; 45.6% women) who underwent isolated SAVR from January 2000 to March 2016. Those with pure aortic insufficiency and concomitant other cardiac operations were excluded from this study cohort. The presence of a significant PPM was defined as an indexed effective orifice area 0.85 cm2/m2 or less. The outcome of interest was all-cause deaths. Propensity score matching was performed for adjusting bias.

RESULTS

Significant PPM was present in 247 patients (27.6%). During the follow-up period (mean 71.2 ± 51.04 months), 134 patients (15%) died. Survival rates at 10 and 15 years were 78.3% vs 83.8% and 71.3% vs 57.6% in the PPM and non-PPM groups (P = 0.972). Risk factor analysis indicated that developing PPM was not associated with a risk of death. After propensity score matching (1:1), developing PPM was not a risk factor for long-term death as well (P = 0.584).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant PPM was common after SAVR in patients with aortic stenosis. However, there was no significant difference in survival rate between those with and without PPM.

Mid-term follow-up after aortic valve replacement with the Carpentier Edwards Magna Ease prosthesis

BACKGROUND

Approximately 250,000 heart valve operations are performed annually worldwide. An intensive research and development effort has led to progressively more advanced heart valve prostheses. The Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna Ease (CEPME) prosthesis represents the latest iteration of the Edwards Perimount series of aortic tissue valves. The current study aims to evaluate the midterm performance of this bioprosthesis.

METHODS

Five hundred and eighteen patients with aortic stenosis underwent aortic valve replacement with the CEPME valve at Papworth Hospital between August 2008 and November 2011. After a minimum of 3 years from the index operation, eligible patients were retrospectively and consecutively recruited to participate. Recruitment was closed after 100 eligible patients had completed all study assessments. Investigations at follow-up included echocardiography, and NYHA status. Primary endpoints included valve performance measures.

RESULTS

The mean age was 72 years, 64% were male and median follow-up was 5.1 years. NYHA status had improved in 66% of patients. The average postoperative peak and mean pressure gradients decreased by 51.2 mmHg (64.5%) and 31.8 mmHg (59.4%), with a significant improvement in NYHA status. The frequency of moderate aortic regurgitation was 3%. There was no evidence for structural valve deterioration.

CONCLUSIONS

The CEPME has excellent mid-term durability. Its use effectively improves haemodynamics and functional capacity.

Computed Tomography Annular Dimensions: A Novel Method to Compare Prosthetic Valve Hemodynamics

BACKGROUND

The Cardiac Surgical Societies Valve Labeling Task Force consensus document acknowledged inconsistent sizing and labeling of prosthetic heart valves. This study compared the labeled size, internal diameter, and hemodynamics of different surgical and transcatheter valve types implanted into the same size annulus, measured by preprocedural computed tomography (CT).

METHODS

Patients were retrospectively sorted into 3 CT annular diameter size groups: small (less than 23 mm), medium (23 to less than 26 mm), and large (26 mm or greater). Surgical valves were sorted into 4 categories based on tissue and design: (stentless porcine, standard stented bovine, wraparound stented bovine, and stented porcine). Comparisons were made within the surgical types and with a transcatheter valve. Echocardiograms were independently assessed and CTs were centrally measured.

RESULTS

We analyzed 726 surgical and 923 transcatheter valve paired data sets. Among the various valve types implanted into the same size CT annulus, there were significant differences regarding size, internal diameter, and hemodynamics within all 3 size groups. Root enlargement procedures occurred in 1.2% with no differences across valve types or size groups. Transcatheter valve hemodynamics were similar to stentless valves and were significantly better than all stented valves. There was no difference in hemodynamics between the 2 bovine stented valve types, and stented porcine valves were inferior to all valve types.

CONCLUSIONS

This study documents that prosthetic heart valve sizing and labeling inconsistencies exist. Use of preoperative CT annular dimensions is the most accurate method to compare size, internal diameter, and hemodynamics of bioprosthetic aortic valves because it compares values among various valve types implanted into the same size annulus.

4D Flow MRI hemodynamic benchmarking of surgical bioprosthetic valves

PURPOSE

We exploited 4-dimensional flow magnetic resonance imaging (4D Flow), combined with a standardized in vitro setting, to establish a comprehensive benchmark for the systematic hemodynamic comparison of surgical aortic bioprosthetic valves (BPVs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

4D Flow analysis was performed on two small sizes of three commercialized pericardial BPVs (Trifecta™ GT, Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT Magna and Crown PRT®). Each BPV was tested over a clinically pertinent range of continuous flow rates within an in vitro MRI-compatible system, equipped with pressure transducers. In-house 4D Flow post-processing of the post-valvular velocity field included the quantification of BPV effective orifice area (EOA), transvalvular pressure gradients (TPG), kinetic energy and viscous energy dissipation.

RESULTS

The 4D Flow technique effectively captured the 3-dimensional flow pattern of each device. Trifecta exhibited the lowest range of velocity and kinetic energy, maximized EOA (p < 0.0001) and minimized TPGs (p ≤ 0.015) if compared with Magna and Crown, these reporting minor EOA difference s (p ≥ 0.042) and similar TPGs (p ≥ 0.25). 4D Flow TPGs estimations strongly correlated against ground-truth data from pressure transducers; viscous energy dissipation proved to be inversely proportional to the fluid jet penetration.

CONCLUSION

The proposed 4D Flow analysis pinpointed consistent hemodynamic differences among BPVs, highlighting the not negligible effect of device size on the fluidynamic outcomes. The efficacy of non-invasive 4D Flow MRI protocol could shed light on how standardize the comparison among devices in relation to their actual hemodynamic performances and improve current criteria for their selection.

Patient-prosthesis mismatch following aortic valve replacement

Patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) occurs when an implanted prosthetic valve is too small for the patient; severe PPM is defined as an indexed effective orifice area (iEOA) <0.65 cm2/m2 following aortic valve replacement (AVR). This review examines articles from the past 10 years addressing the prevalence, outcomes and options for prevention and treatment of PPM after AVR. Prevalence of PPM ranges from 8% to almost 80% in individual studies. PPM is thought to have an impact on mortality, mainly in patients with severe PPM, although severe PPM accounts for only 10–15% of cases. Outcomes of patients with moderate PPM are not significantly different to those without PPM. PPM is associated with higher rates of perioperative stroke and renal failure and lack of left ventricular mass regression. Predictors include female sex, older age, hypertension, diabetes, renal failure and higher surgical risk score. PPM may be a marker of comorbidity rather than a risk factor for adverse outcomes. PPM should be suspected in patients with persistent cardiac symptoms after AVR when there is high prosthetic valve velocity or gradient and a small calculated effective orifice area. After exclusion of other causes of increased transvalvular gradient, re-intervention may be considered if symptoms persist and are unresponsive to medical therapy. However, this decision needs to consider the available options to relieve PPM and whether expected benefits justify the risk of intervention. The only effective intervention is redo surgery with implantation of a larger valve and/or annular enlargement. Therefore, focus needs to be on prevention.

Optimising the Haemodynamics of Aortic Valve-in-valve Procedures

Bioprosthetic surgical valves are increasingly implanted during cardiac surgery, instead of mechanical valves. These tissue valves are associated with limited durability and as a result transcatheter valve-in-valve procedures are performed to treat failed bioprostheses. A relatively common adverse event of aortic valve-in-valve procedures is residual stenosis. Larger surgical valve size, supra-annular transcatheter heart valve type, as well as higher transcatheter heart valve implantation depth, have all been shown to reduce the incidence of elevated post-procedural gradients. With greater understanding of technical considerations and surgical planning, valve-in-valve procedures could be more effective and eventually may become the standard of care for our increasingly ageing and comorbid population with failed surgical bioprostheses.

Performance of the Labcor Dokimos Plus pericardial aortic prosthesis: a single-centre experience

Objectives

In patients with a small aortic annulus, aortic valve replacement (AVR) is frequently associated with high residual pressure gradients. Supra-annular pericardial aortic prostheses are gaining popularity due to the increased effective orifice areas (EOA) and resulting lower gradients. This study reports the clinical and echocardiographic results following implantation of the new supra-annular pericardial aortic prosthesis Dokimos Plus (Labcor, Belo Horizonte, Brazil).

Methods

Between October 2013 and July 2015, 137 patients (41% women, mean age: 74 years) underwent supra-annular AVR with or without concomitant procedures using the Dokimos Plus prosthesis in our department. Transthoracic echocardiography was performed pre- and postoperatively on all patients to assess haemodynamic parameters (gradients, acceleration time [AT], Doppler velocity indices [DVIs] and indexed EOA [EOAI]) and to detect paravalvular leakage (PVL). Data were collected retrospectively from our hospital databases.

Methods

Patients were grouped by prosthesis size: Most patients received 23-mm (57.6%), followed by 21-mm (19%), 25-mm (15.4%) and 27-mm (8%) prostheses. The mean EOAI in all groups was 1.1 ± 0.26 cm 2 /m 2 . Pressure gradients were low in all groups (mean: 8.9 ± 4.4 mmHg; peak: 18.8 ± 6.8 mmHg); AT and DVI were in the normal range according to American Society of Echocardiography/European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging recommendations (mean AT 73.3 ± 29 ms; mean DVI 0.5 ± 0.2). One patient had severe PVL and one presented with central regurgitation, both requiring re-intervention. The mortality rate was 5.1% ( n  = 7); none of the cases was associated with valve insufficiency.

Conclusions

The Dokimos prosthesis showed a satisfactory overall performance, presenting low gradients and DVIs as well as high EOAI. Further investigations are needed to analyse the cases of regurgitation and monitor long-term performance.

Significant intra-valvular pressure loss across EPIC SUPRA and perimount magna supra-annular designed aortic bioprostheses in patients with normal aortic size

Doppler-derived trans-prosthetic gradients are higher and the estimated effective valve area is smaller than the catheter-derived and directly measured hemodynamic values, mostly due to pressure recovery phenomenon. Pressure recovery to a varying extent is common to all prosthetic heart valves including bioprostheses. Pressure recovery-related differences are usually small except in patients with bileaflet metallic prosthesis, wherein high-pressure local jets across central orifice have been documented since long back and also in patients with narrow aortic root. We describe two patients with normally functioning stented aortic bioprostheses with supra-annular design (EPIC SUPRA and PERIMOUNT MAGNA), wherein very high trans-prosthetic gradients and critically reduced estimated effective valve orifice areas in presence of normal aortic size were consistently recorded over long periods of follow-up. The valve leaflets, however had normal excursion, were thin, opened with a triangular or oblong shape and had expected geometric valve area (1.7 and 1.6 cm² respectively) measured by 3D trans-oesophageal echocardiographic planimetry. Pressure recovery upstream the valves accounted for 20% and 12% of total pressure gradients respectively. Dominant site for pressure drop was intra-valvular (75–85%). Such a phenomenon has not been reported in vivo for these two valve designs.

Aortic valve replacement with sutureless and rapid deployment aortic valve prostheses

Aortic valve stenosis is the most common valve disease in the western world. Over the past few years the number of aortic valve replacement (AVR) interventions has increased with outcomes that have been improved despite increasing age of patients and increasing burden of comorbidities. However, despite such excellent results and its well-established position, conventional AVR has undergone great development over the previous two decades. Such progress, by way of less invasive incisions and use of new technologies, including transcatheter aortic valve implantation and sutureless valve prostheses, is intended to reduce the traumatic impact of the surgical procedure, thus fulfilling lower risk patients' expectations on the one hand, and extending the operability toward increasingly high-risk patients on the other. Sutureless and rapid deployment aortic valves are biological, pericardial prostheses that anchor within the aortic annulus with no more than three sutures. The sutureless prostheses, by avoiding the passage and the tying of the sutures, significantly reduce operative times and may improve outcomes. However, there is still a paucity of robust, evidence-based data on the role and performance of sutureless AVR. Therefore, strongest long-term data, randomized studies and registry data are required to adequately assess the durability and long-term outcomes of sutureless aortic valve replacement.

Aortic valve decalcification for severe aortic valve stenosis in the elderly: medium-term results

AIMS

To present the results of a novel technique of aortic valve decalcification (AVD) in a consecutive population of elderly patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (AVS) and small aortic annulus.

METHODS

Between January 2008 and December 2012, a consecutive series of 34 patients (mean age 80 ± 13 years) with severe AVS were operated on using AVD. They were compared with a matched population of 68 patients (mean age 82 ± 7 years) submitted to aortic valve replacement (AVR) with bioprosthesis. The two groups were comparable for cardiac risk factors and admission symptoms. Preoperatively, all patients presented with severe AVS, small aortic annulus (19 mm) and preserved left ventricular function.

RESULTS

Thirty-day mortality was 8.8 vs. 7.5% in the AVD and AVR groups, respectively (P = 0.88). Actuarial 2 and 5-year survival rates were 80 vs. 82% and 64 vs. 78% in the AVD and AVR groups, respectively (P = 0.27). Long-term valve-related events incidence was significantly higher in the AVD group (12%) compared with that in the AVR group (4%; P = 0.01). However, in the AVD group, patients with no or mild residual AR experienced 2 and 5 years of freedom from valve-related events, which is not significantly different from the patients submitted to the AVR group (P = 0.76). After AVD, a significant increase in the aortic valve area (from 0.8 to 1.9 cm) and a parallel reduction in the mean gradient (from 40 to 12 mmHg) was observed in all patients (P = 0.01). Postoperative aortic valve area (1.9 vs. 1.26 cm), as well as mean gradient (12 vs. 21 mmHg), were significantly better in the AVD group compared with that in the AVR group (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In this preliminary experience, AVD seems a good therapeutic option for elderly patients with severe AVS. Further studies with longer follow-up are needed in order to confirm these preliminary results and to ascertain the valve durability over time.

Sutureless aortic valve replacement

The increasing incidence of aortic stenosis and greater co-morbidities and risk profiles of the contemporary patient population has driven the development of minimally invasive aortic valve surgery and percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) techniques to reduce surgical trauma. Recent technological developments have led to an alternative minimally invasive option which avoids the placement and tying of sutures, known as "sutureless" or rapid deployment aortic valves. Potential advantages for sutureless aortic prostheses include reducing cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) duration, facilitating minimally invasive surgery and complex cardiac interventions, whilst maintaining satisfactory hemodynamic outcomes and low paravalvular leak rates. However, given its recent developments, the majority of evidence regarding sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) is limited to observational studies and there is a paucity of adequately-powered randomized studies. Recently, the International Valvular Surgery Study Group (IVSSG) has formulated to conduct the Sutureless Projects, set to be the largest international collaborative group to investigate this technology. This keynote lecture will overview the use, the potential advantages, the caveats, and current evidence of sutureless and rapid deployment aortic valve replacement (AVR).

Rigorous patient-prosthesis matching of Perimount Magna aortic bioprosthesis

Background

Severe patient-prosthesis mismatch, defined as effective orifice area index ≤0.65 cm2 m−2, has demonstrated poor long-term survival after aortic valve replacement. Reported rates of severe mismatch involving the Perimount Magna aortic bioprosthesis range from 4% to 20% in patients with a small annulus.

Methods

Between June 2008 and August 2011, 251 patients (mean age 70.5 ± 10.2 years; mean body surface area 1.55 ± 0.19 m2) underwent aortic valve replacement with a Perimount Magna bioprosthesis, with or without concomitant procedures. We performed our procedure with rigorous patient-prosthesis matching to implant a valve appropriately sized to each patient, and carried out annular enlargement when a 19-mm valve did not fit. The bioprosthetic performance was evaluated by transthoracic echocardiography predischarge and at 1 and 2 years after surgery.

Results

Overall hospital mortality was 1.6%. Only 5 (2.0%) patients required annular enlargement. The mean follow-up period was 19.1 ± 10.7 months with a 98.4% completion rate. Predischarge data showed a mean effective orifice area index of 1.21 ± 0.20 cm2 m−2. Moderate mismatch, defined as effective orifice area index ≤0.85 cm2 m−2, developed in 4 (1.6%) patients. None developed severe mismatch. Data at 1 and 2 years showed only two cases of moderate mismatch; neither was severe.

Conclusions

Rigorous patient-prosthesis matching maximized the performance of the Perimount Magna, and no severe mismatch resulted in this Japanese population of aortic valve replacement patients.

Multidetector CT predictors of prosthesis-patient mismatch in transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) is a predictor of mortality after aortic valve replacement (AVR).

OBJECTIVE

We examined whether accurate 3-dimensional annular sizing with multidetector CT (MDCT) is predictive of PPM after transcatheter AVR (TAVR).

METHODS

One hundred twenty-eight patients underwent MDCT then TAVR. Moderate PPM was defined as an indexed effective orifice area ≤0.85 cm²/m² and severe ≤0.65 cm²/m². MDCT annular measurements (area, short and long axis) were compared with the size of the selected transcatheter heart valve (THV) to obtain (1) the difference between prosthesis size and CT-measured mean annular diameter and (2) the percentage of undersizing or oversizing (calculated as 100 × [MDCT annular area--THV nominal area]/THV nominal area). In addition, the MDCT annular area was indexed to body surface area. These measures were evaluated as potential PPM predictors.

RESULTS

We found that 42.2% of patients had moderate PPM and 9.4% had severe PPM. Procedural characteristics and in-hospital outcomes were similar between patients with or without PPM. THV undersizing of the mean aortic annulus diameter was not predictive of PPM (odds ratio [OR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.65-1.07; P = .16; area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.58). THV undersizing of annular area was not predictive of PPM (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.80-1.16; P = .69; AUC, 0.52). Indexed MDCT annular area was, however, predictive of PPM (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10-0.59; P < .001; AUC, 0.66).

CONCLUSIONS

PPM is frequent after TAVR. Appropriate annular oversizing does not reduce the rate or severity of PPM. Patient annulus size mismatch, identified by indexed MDCT annular area, is a significant predictor of PPM.

Obesity and the risk of late mortality after aortic valve replacement with small prosthesis

BACKGROUND

Whether obesity is related to late mortality with implantation of small aortic prosthesis remains to be clarified. This study was aimed to evaluate the effect of obesity on late survival of patients after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with implantation of small aortic prosthesis (size ≤ 21 mm).

METHODS

From January 1998 to December 2008, 307 patients in our institution who underwent primary AVR with smaller prostheses survived the 30 days after surgery. Patients were defined as normal if body mass index (BMI) was < 24 kg/m2, as overweight if BMI 24-27.9 kg/m2, and as obese if BMI ≥ 28 kg/m2. Data of New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional classification, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), effective orifice area index (EOAI), and left ventricular mass index (LVMI) of the patients collected at the 3rd month (M), 6th M, 1st year (Y), 3rd Y, 5th Y, 8th Y after operation respectively.

RESULTS

By multivariable analysis, obesity was an independent factor of late mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.62; P = 0.01). The obesity and overweight group had more poor survival (p < 0.001) and higher proportion of NYHA class III/IV (p < 0.01) compared with the normal group. Lower EOAI and higher LVMI were found in obesity and overweight group, but we saw no significant difference about LVEF among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Obesity was associated with increased late mortality of patients after AVR with implantation of small aortic prosthesis. Being obese or and overweight may also affect the NYHA classification, even in the longer term. EOAI should be improved where possible, as it may reduce late mortality and improve quality of life in obese or overweight patients.

One-year hemodynamic comparison of Perimount Magna with St Jude Epic aortic bioprostheses

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac surgeons are using more bioprosthetic valves due to the ageing population as well as to improvements that have been made to these implants. We sought to compare the 1-year hemodynamics of two commercially available valves by echocardiographic parameters.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective review of our institutional database revealed 69 patients who received either Perimount Magna (n = 33) or St Jude Epic (n = 36) valves in the aortic position with no other valve surgery between June 2004 and March 2006. All patients received transthoracic echocardiography at 1 year. Comparisons between groups were made at baseline and at 1-year follow-up. In addition, a pairwise comparison was performed in each patient to determine the change in echocardiographic parameters between baseline and follow-up.

RESULTS

Mean implanted valve size was similar (Magna 24.3 ±2.0 mm vs. Epic 24.1 ±2.2 mm). Pre- and intraoperative patient variables were similar between the two groups. There were lower peak and mean pressure gradients in the Magna group, both at discharge and one year after surgery. This correlated with a larger indexed effective orifice area (Magna 0.8 ±0.2 cm(2)/m(2) vs. Epic 0.67 ±0.2 cm(2)/m(2), p = 0.02). In spite of these findings, left ventricular mass regression was not different.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that in a series with relatively low indexed effective orifice areas, the peak and mean gradients obtained were acceptable. More clinical follow-up of these patients is required to assess the true impact of prosthesis patient mismatch.

Obesity is associated with higher long-term mortality after aortic valve replacement with small prosthesis

OBJECTIVE

Although many studies have evaluated the impacts of obesity on various medical treatments, it is not known whether obesity is related to late mortality with implantation of small aortic prosthesis. This study evaluated the effect of obesity on late survival of patients after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with implantation of small aortic prosthesis (size ≤ 21 mm).

METHODS

From January 1998 to December 2008, 536 patients in our institution who underwent primary AVR (307 patients with smaller prostheses) survived the 30 days after surgery. Patients were categorised as normal weight if body mass index (BMI) was ≤ 25 kg/m(2), as overweight if BMI 25-30 kg/m(2), and as obese if BMI ≥ 30 kg/m(2). Data were collected at the third-month (M), sixth-M, first-year (Y), third-Y, fifth-Y, and eighth-Y after operation.

RESULTS

By multivariable analysis, obesity was a significant independent factor of late mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.59; p=0.006). The obese and overweight groups of patients exhibited lower survival (p<0.001) and a higher proportion in NYHA class III/IV (p<0.01) compared with the normal group. Lower EOAI and higher left ventricular mass index were found in the obese and overweight groups, but we saw no significant variance in LVEF among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Obesity was associated with increased late mortality of patients after AVR with implantation of small aortic prosthesis. Being obese or and overweight may also affect the NYHA classification, even in the longer term.

The Perceval S aortic valve has the potential of shortening surgical time: does it also result in improved outcome?

BACKGROUND

Sutureless aortic valve prostheses have the potential of shortening surgical time. However, whether shorter operative times may also result in improved patient outcomes remains to be established.

METHODS

One hundred patients underwent minimally invasive isolated aortic valve replacement. Of these, 50 patients received a Perceval (Sorin Group, Saluggia, Italy) bioprosthesis (group P) and 50 patients received a non-Perceval valve (group NP).

RESULTS

The group P patients were older (77.5 ± 5.3 versus 71.7 ± 10 years, p = 0.001) and at higher risk (logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation [EuroSCORE] 9.9 ± 6.5 versus 4.3 ± 1, p = 0.001) than group NP patients. One implant failure occurred in group P (p = 0.5), and conversion to full sternotomy was necessary in 1 patient from each group. Aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times were 39.4% and 34% shorter in group P (both p < 0.001). Within 30 days, a total of 5 patients died (2 in group P and 3 in group NP, p = 0.5). No significant differences were observed between groups in postoperative arrhythmias and need for pacemaker implantation (p = 0.3 and p = 0.5, respectively). Despite the higher surgical risk, group P patients less frequently required blood transfusion (1.1 ± 1.1 units versus 2.3 ± 2.8 units, p = 0.007), and had a shorter intensive care unit stay (1.9 ± 0.7 versus 2.8 ± 1.9 days, p = 0.002) and a shorter intubation time (9.2 ± 3.6 hours versus 15 ± 13.8 hours, p = 0.01). Group NP patients had a mean prosthesis size significantly smaller than for group P (23 ± 2 mm versus 23.9 ± 1.1 mm, p = 0.01). The Perceval valve provided comparable hemodynamic performance to that of non-Perceval valves (mean gradient 8.4 ± 6 mm Hg versus 10 ± 4.9 mm Hg, p = 0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

Sutureless implantation of the Perceval valve is associated with shorter cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times, resulting in improved clinical outcome. In addition, it compares favorably with conventional valves in terms of mortality and outcome variables.

Impact of obesity on long-term survival after aortic valve replacement with a small prosthesis

OBJECTIVES

Although many studies have evaluated the impact of obesity on various medical treatments, it is not known whether obesity is related to late mortality with implantation of small aortic prostheses. This study evaluated the effect of obesity on the late survival of patients after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with implantation of a small aortic prosthesis (size ≤ 21 mm).

METHODS

From January 1998 to December 2008, 307 patients in our institution who underwent primary AVR with smaller prostheses survived 30 days after surgery. Patients were categorized as normal weight if body mass index (BMI) was <24 kg/m(2), overweight if BMI 24-27.9 kg/m(2) and obese if BMI ≥ 28 kg/m(2). Data of the New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional classification, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), effective orifice area index (EOAI) and left ventricular mass index of the patients were collected at the third month, sixth month, first year, third year, fifth year and eighth year after operation.

RESULTS

By multivariable analysis, obesity was a significant independent factor of late mortality (hazard ratio: 1.62; P = 0.01). The obese and overweight groups of patients exhibited lower survival (P < 0.001) and a higher proportion in NYHA Class III/IV (P < 0.01) compared with the normal group. A lower EOAI and higher left ventricular mass index were found in the obese and overweight groups, but we saw no significant variance in LVEF among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Obesity is associated with increased late mortality of patients after AVR with implantation of small aortic prosthesis. Obesity or/and overweight may also affect the NYHA classification, even in the longer term. EOAI should be improved where possible, as it may reduce late mortality and improve quality of life in obese or overweight patients.

Aortic valve and ascending aorta guidelines for management and quality measures: executive summary

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines are intended to assist physicians and other health care providers in clinical decision making by describing a range of generally acceptable approaches for the diagnosis, management, or prevention of specific diseases or conditions. These guidelines should not be considered inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed at obtaining the same results. Moreover, these guidelines are subject to change over time, without notice. The ultimate judgment regarding the care of a particular patient must be made by the physician in light of the individual circumstances presented by the patient.

Application of Regent mechanical valve in patients with small aortic annulus: 3-year follow-up

Background

Aortic valve replacement (AVR) with a small aortic annulus is always challenging for the cardiac surgeon. In this study, we sought to evaluate the midterm performance of implantation with a 17-mm or 19-mm St. Jude Medical Regent (SJM Regent) mechanical valve in retrospective consecutive cohort of patients with small aortic annulus (diameter ≤ 19 mm).

Methods

From January 2008 to April 2011, 40 patients (31 female, mean age = 47.2 ± 5.8 years) with small aortic annulus (≤19 mm in diameter) underwent aortic valve replacement with a 17-mm or 19-mm St. Jude Medical Regent (SJM Regent) mechanical valve. Preoperative mean body surface area, New York Heart Association class, and mean aortic annulus were 1.61 ± 0.26 m², 3.2 ± 0.4, and 18 ± 1.4 mm respectively. Patients were divided into two groups, according to the implantation of 17 mm SJM Regent mechanical valve (group 1, n = 18) or 19 mm SJM Regent valve (group 2, n = 22). All patients underwent echocardiography examination preoperatively and at one year post-operation.

Results

There were no early deaths in either group. Follow-up time averaged 36 ± 17.6 months. The mean postoperative New York Heart Association class was 1.3 ± 0.6 (p < 0.001). By echocardiography, in group 1, the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular fraction shortening (LVFS), and the indexed effective orifice area (EOAI) increased from 43.7% ± 11.6%, 27.3% ± 7.6%, and 0.70 ± 0.06 cm²/m² to 69.8 ± 9.3%, 41.4 ± 8.3%, and 0.92 ± 0.10 cm²/m² respectively (P < 0.05), while the left ventricular mass index (LVMI), and the aortic transvalvular pressure gradient decreased from 116.4 ± 25.4 g/m², 46.1 ± 8.5 mmHg to 86.7 ± 18.2 g/m² , 13.7 ± 5.2 mmHg respectively. In group 2, the LVEF, LVFS and EOAI increased from 45.9% ± 9.7%, 30.7% ± 8.0%, and 0.81 ± 0.09 cm²/m² to 77.4% ± 9.7%, 44.5% ± 9.6%, and 1.27 ± 0.11 cm²/m² respectively, while the LVMI, and the aortic transvalvular pressure gradient decreased from 118.3 ± 27.6 g/m², 44.0 ± 6.7 mmHg to 80.1 ± 19.7 g/m², 10.8 ± 4.1 mmHg as well. The prevalence of PPM was documented in 2 patients in Group 1.

Conclusions

Patients with small aortic annulus and body surface area, experienced satisfactory clinical improvement after aortic valve replacement with modern SJM Regent bileaflet prostheses.

Aortic valve replacement with the Cardioprotese Premium bovine pericardium bioprosthesis: four-year clinical results

OBJECTIVES

This study reports the initial clinical and echocardiographic results of the Premium bioprosthetic aortic valve up to 4 years of follow-up.

METHODS

Between October 2007 and July 2011, 121 consecutive patients were submitted for aortic valve replacement with the Premium bioprosthetic valve. The mean age was 68 ± 9 years and 64 patients were males. The patients were periodically evaluated by clinical and echocardiographic examinations. The mean follow-up was 21 months (min = 2, max = 48), yielding 217 patients/year for the analysis.

RESULTS

The hospital mortality was 8%. Late survival at 3 years was 89% (95% CI: 81.9-93.3%), and 80% of the patients were in NYHA functional class I/II. The rates of valve-related complications were low, with a linearized incidence of 0.9%/100 patients/year for thromboembolic complications, 0% for haemorrhagic events and 0.9%/100 patients/year of bacterial endocarditis. There was no case of primary structural valve dysfunction. The mean effective orifice area was 1.61 ± 0.45 cm(2); mean gradient 13 ± 5 mmHg and peak gradient 22 ± 9 mmHg. Significant patient-prosthesis mismatch was found in only 11% of the cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The Premium bioprosthetic aortic valve demonstrated very satisfactory clinical and echocardiographic results up to 4 years, similar to other commercially available, third-generation bioprosthetic valves.

Early Doppler-echocardiography evaluation of Carpentier-Edwards Standard and Carpentier-Edwards Magna aortic prosthetic valve: comparison of hemodynamic performance

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to describe Doppler-echocardiography values of Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Standard (CEPS) and Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna (CEPM) aortic prosthetic valves, evaluated by a single, experienced echo-laboratory, early in the postoperative phase.

METHODS

Three-hundred-seventy-seven consecutive patients, who had had a CEPS or a CEPM implanted in our Hospital due to aortic stenosis and/or insufficiency, underwent baseline Doppler echocardiography evaluation within 7 days after surgery. Hemodynamic performances of CEPS and CEPM were accurately described, evaluating flow-dependent (transprosthetic velocities and gradients) and flow-independent (effective orifice area, indexed effective orifice area and Doppler velocity index) Doppler-echocardiography parameters.

RESULTS

Out of the 377 patients 48.8% were men (n = 184), mean age was 74.63 ± 6.77 years, mean BSA was 1.78 ± 0.18 m2, mean ejection fraction was 57.78 ± 8%. Two-hundred and sixty two CEPS and 115 CEPM were implanted. Comparing size-by-size CEPS with CEPM, both prostheses showed a good hemodynamic profile, with fairly similar values of pressure gradients (PGmax and mean, in mmHg, = 37,18 ± 11.57 and 20.81 ± 7.44 in CEPS n°19 compared to 32,47 ± 7,76 and 17,67 ± 4.63 in CEPM n°19 and progressively lower in higher sized prostheses, having PGmax and mean 15 ± 3,16 and 9.15 ± 1,29 in CEPS n°29 compared to 15,67 ± 1,53 and 9 ± 1 in CEPM n°29) and EOAi (being 0,65 ± 0,33 cm²/m² in CEPS n°19 compared to 0,77 ± 0,29 cm²/m² in CEPM n°19 and progressively higher in higher sized prostheses, being 1,28 ± 0,59 cm²/m² in CEPS n°29 compared to 1,07 ± 0,18 cm²/m² in CEPM n°29), the latter resulting, however, basically less flow obstructive.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data confirm the good hemodynamic performance of both aortic bioprostheses and the more favourable hemodynamic profile of CEPM compared to CEPS, pointing out the need to perform routinely an accurate baseline Doppler-echocardiography evaluation early after surgery to allow an adequate interpretation of data at follow-up.

Outcomes and complications of transcatheter aortic valve replacement using a balloon expandable valve according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) guidelines

AIMS

There is heterogeneity in the reporting of procedural outcomes and complications following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Recently, new definitions have been proposed by the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) in an effort to standardise these outcomes and improve the quality of future clinical research. The aim of this study is to report the procedural outcomes and complication rates following TAVR in a large sequential patient cohort using a balloon expandable valve according to the new VARC definitions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Three hundred and ten consecutive patients undergoing TAVR were assessed, including patients forming our early historical series at the infancy of TAVR. All complication rates were re-evaluated according to VARC definitions. Mean age was 82.2 ± 8.1 years and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 9.4 ± 5.7%. Transfemoral 30-day mortality was 6.8% (3.8% in the second half of the cohort) and transapical 30-day mortality was 13.7% (9.4% in the second half of the cohort). Cardiovascular 30-day mortality was 7.4% and the composite safety endpoint at 30-days was 18.4%. Device success was 80% (post-procedural valve area ≤ 1.2 cm2 in 9.7%). Failure to deliver and deploy a valve occurred in only 3.5%, with 82% (nine cases) occurring in the first half of the experience. Of those who did not meet echocardiographic criteria for device success (valve area ≤ 1.2 cm2, transaortic gradient ≥ 20 mmHg or ≥ moderate aortic incompetence), 90% achieved a New York Heart Association class I/II. Life threatening bleeding complications occurred in 8.4%. In 7.7% of patients, red blood cell transfusions were given without evidence of overt bleeding. Major strokes occurred in 2.3% and acute kidney injury occurred in 6.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

The VARC consensus guidelines provide a standardised reporting framework for clinical endpoints and complications post TAVR. We report the first series to our knowledge of 30-day outcomes using these definitions utilising a balloon expandable valve system.

Choice of prosthetic heart valve in adults an update

In the last 7 years, more data have reconfirmed that patients' comorbid conditions are very important factors determining patient outcomes. Prosthetic heart valves (PHVs) that require aortic root replacement in the absence of aortic root disease are associated with poorer outcomes. For the vast majority of patients, the choice of PHV is between a mechanical valve and a stented bioprosthesis. The choice is largely dependent upon the age of the patient at the time of PHV implantation and on which complication the patient wants to avoid: specifically, anticoagulation therapy and its complications with the mechanical valve, and structural valve deterioration with a bioprosthesis. Data on the pros and cons of the choices and exceptions to the rules are discussed, and a new algorithm is developed.

Absence of prosthesis-patient mismatch with the new generation of Edwards stented aortic bioprosthesis

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) remains a controversial issue with the most recent stented biological valves. We analyzed the incidence of PPM after implantation of the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna Ease aortic valve (PMEAV) bioprosthesis and assessed the early clinical outcome. Two hundred and seventy consecutive patients who received a PMEAV bioprosthesis between January 2007 and July 2008 were analyzed. Pre-, peri- and postoperative data were assessed and echocardiographic as well as clinical follow-up was performed. Mean age was 72+/-9 years, 168 (62.2%) were males. Fifty-seven patients (21.1%) were below 65 years of age. Absence of PPM, corresponding to an indexed effective orifice area >0.85 cm(2)/m(2), was 99.5%. Observed in-hospital mortality was 2.2% (six patients), with a predicted mortality according to the additive EuroSCORE of 7.6+/-3.1%. At echocardiographic assessment after a mean follow-up period of 150+/-91 days, mean transvalvular gradient was 11.8+/-4.8 mmHg (all valve sizes). No paravalvular leakage was seen. Nine patients died during follow-up. The Carpentier-Edwards PMEAV bioprosthesis shows excellent hemodynamic performance. This valve can be implanted in all sizes with an incidence of severe PPM below 0.5%.

Mid-term evaluation of Sorin Soprano bioprostheses in patients with a small aortic annulus <or=20 mm

We set to examine the mid-term outcome after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with Soprano pericardial stented bioprosthesis measuring <or=20 mm. Sixty-eight patients underwent AVR between June 2003 and January 2006 (50 women; median age 77 years; range 60-89 years). Preoperatively, 60 patients (88.2%) were in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV. The mean EuroSCORE was 6.7+/-2.3. Supra-annular aortoplasty was performed in 21 patients (30.9%), out of which 11 patients received an 18 mm prosthesis (55%). The median follow-up was 45.5 months (0.1-62 months). The 30-day mortality was 4.4% (n=3) with no early valve-related deaths. No patient suffered a cerebrovascular accident and no patient required replacement of prosthesis for coronary malperfusion. Postoperatively, the mean gradient across the 18 mm bioprosthesis (n=20) was 25+/-8.9 mmHg and across the 20 mm bioprosthesis (n=48) was 25.5+/-7.3 mmHg (P=NS). During follow-up, there was no valve-related death, re-operation for structural valve degeneration, endocarditis or valve thrombosis. There were five late deaths and actuarial survival at three and five years was 92.7+/-3.1% and 81.0+/-6.9%, respectively. At last follow-up, 86.7% (n=52) of survivors were in NYHA class I/II. AVR with Soprano bioprosthesis measuring <or=20 mm is associated with excellent mid-term outcome. Continued follow-up is required to determine the long-term efficacy of the prosthesis.

Feasibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance to assess the orifice area of aortic bioprostheses

BACKGROUND

Prosthetic orifice area, usually calculated by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) or transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), provides important information regarding the hemodynamic performance of aortic bioprostheses. However, both TTE and TEE have limitations; therefore accurate and reproducible determination of the orifice area often remains a challenge. The present study aimed to investigate the feasibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) to assess the orifice areas of aortic bioprostheses.

METHODS AND RESULTS

CMR planimetry of the orifice area was performed in 65 patients (43/22 stented/stentless prostheses; mean time since implantation, 3.1+/-2.8 years; mean orifice area [TTE], 1.70+/-0.43 cm(2); 62 normally functioning prostheses, 2 severe stenoses, and 1 severe regurgitation) in an imaging plane perpendicular to the transprosthetic flow using steady-state free-precession cine imaging under breath-hold conditions on a 1.5-T MR system. CMR results were compared with TTE (continuity equation, n=65) and TEE (planimetry, n=31). CMR planimetry was readily feasible in 80.0%; feasible with limitation in 15.4% because of stent, flow, and sternal wire artifacts; and impossible in 4.6% because of flow artifacts. Correlations of the orifice areas by CMR with TTE (r=0.82) and CMR with TEE (r=0.92) were significant. The average difference between the methods was -0.02+/-0.24 cm(2) (TTE) and 0.05+/-0.15 cm(2) (TEE). Agreement was present for stented and stentless devices and independent of orifice size. Intraobserver and interobserver variabilities of CMR planimetry were 6.7+/-5.4% and 11.5+/-7.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

The assessment of aortic bioprostheses with normal orifice areas by CMR is technically feasible and provides orifice areas with a close correlation to echocardiography and low observer dependency.

Hemodynamic evaluation and midterm outcome of aortic valve replacement with size 19 Perimount prosthetic valve

BACKGROUND

We sought to investigate the effect of patient prosthesis mismatch on hemodynamic profile using dobutamine stress echocardiography, and to evaluate midterm survival of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement with 19-mm Perimount (Baxter Healthcare, Santa Ana, California) aortic prosthetic valves.

METHODS

Between December 1, 1999, and August 17, 2005, 147 patients (mean age, 76.8 +/- 5.51 years) had aortic valves replaced with 19-mm Perimount prostheses. Dobutamine stress echocardiography was performed in a subgroup of 24 patients (mean age, 76.6 +/- 5.60 years). Univariable predictors of peak transprosthetic gradient (PTG) under maximum stress, adjusted for resting PTG, were investigated by regression. Survival in the whole cohort was described, and univariable predictors of survival were investigated by Cox regression.

RESULTS

In the stress echocardiography subgroup, cardiac output (p < 0.0001), PTG (p < 0.0001), and effective orifice area index increased significantly (p = 0.002) under stress. Peak transprosthetic gradient under stress was strongly associated with PTG at rest (p < 0.0001). After controlling for PTG at rest, no other variables were associated with PTG under stress. In the whole cohort, mean duration of follow-up was 2.21 years; 23 patients died. Neither body surface area nor effective orifice area index was significantly associated with survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The 19-mm Perimount aortic prosthesis has acceptable hemodynamic performance. Transvalvular gradients were within a clinically acceptable range, both at rest and under stress. These findings suggest that patient-prosthesis mismatch is unlikely to cause a clinically important problem when the prosthesis is used, which is consistent with survival experience in the whole cohort.