Impact of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Long-Term Survival in Patients With Small St Jude Medical Mechanical Prostheses in the Aortic Position

Background— The impact of aortic prosthesis-patient mismatch (P-PtM) on long-term survival is unclear. Methods and Results— Between 1985 and 2000, 388 patients at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn, underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) with 19- or 21-mm St Jude Medical prostheses and had transthoracic echocardiography within 1 year after AVR. Mean age of patients was 62±13 years; 69% were female. Prosthesis effective orifice area (EOA) was derived from the continuity equation. P-PtM was classified as severe (indexed EOA ≤0.60 cm2/m2), moderate (0.60 cm2/m20.85 cm2/m2). P-PtM was severe in 66 patients (17%), moderate in 168 (43%), and not hemodynamically significant in 154 (40%). Patients with severe P-PtM had a significantly larger body surface area (P<0.0001), higher mean gradient (P<0.0001), lower preoperative (P<0.0001) and postoperative (P<0.0001) ejection fractions, and lower stroke volume (P<0.0001) and more often received a 19-mm prosthesis (P=0.0008) than patients with moderate or no hemodynamically significant mismatch. For patients with severe mismatch, 5-year survival rates (72±6%) and 8-year survival rates (41±8%) were significantly less than for patients with moderate mismatch (80±3% and 65±5%; P=0.026) or no hemodynamically significant mismatch (85±3% and 74±5%; P=0.002). On multivariate analysis after adjustment for other predictors of outcome, severe mismatch was associated with higher mortality (hazard ratio 2.18; 95% confidence interval 1.24 to 3.85; P=0.007) and higher incidence of congestive heart failure (hazard ratio 3.1; 95% confidence interval 1.3 to 7.4; P=0.009) than no hemodynamically significant mismatch. Conclusions— Severe P-PtM is an independent predictor of higher long-term mortality and congestive heart failure in patients with small St Jude Medical aortic valve prostheses. For patients undergoing AVR who are at risk of severe mismatch, every effort should be made to use a larger prosthesis or to consider a prosthesis with a larger EOA.

[1]  N. Birkmeyer,et al.  Prosthesis size and long-term survival after aortic valve replacement. , 2003, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[2]  Philippe Pibarot,et al.  Impact of Valve Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Short-Term Mortality After Aortic Valve Replacement , 2003, Circulation.

[3]  V. Gaudiani,et al.  Routine enlargement of the small aortic root: a preventive strategy to minimize mismatch. , 2002, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[4]  K Caidahl,et al.  Assessment of effective orifice area of prosthetic aortic valves with Doppler echocardiography: an in vivo and in vitro study. , 2001, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[5]  P. Pibarot,et al.  Patient-prosthesis mismatch can be predicted at the time of operation. , 2001, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[6]  A. Della Corte,et al.  Standard versus hemodynamic plus 19-mm St Jude Medical aortic valves. , 2001, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[7]  S. Armstrong,et al.  Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch Affects Survival After Aortic Valve Replacement , 2000, Circulation.

[8]  P. Pibarot,et al.  Hemodynamic and clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch in the aortic valve position and its prevention. , 2000, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[9]  B. Lytle,et al.  Aortic valve replacement: is valve size important? , 2000, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[10]  D. Doty,et al.  Factors affecting left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement with stentless valves. , 1999, Seminars in thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[11]  E J Topol,et al.  Cause of death in clinical research: time for a reassessment? , 1999, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[12]  P. Pibarot,et al.  Impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch on hemodynamic and symptomatic status, morbidity and mortality after aortic valve replacement with a bioprosthetic heart valve. , 1998, The Journal of heart valve disease.

[13]  T. David,et al.  Aortic valve replacement with patch enlargement of the aortic annulus. , 1997, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[14]  A. Bert,et al.  Nineteen-millimeter aortic St. Jude Medical heart valve prosthesis: up to sixteen years' follow-up. , 1997, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[15]  J B Seward,et al.  Clinical outcome of mitral regurgitation due to flail leaflet. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  M. Endo,et al.  Aortic valve replacement in small aortic annulus with or without annular enlargement. , 1996, The Journal of heart valve disease.

[17]  G. Laub,et al.  Predictive value of prosthetic valve area index for early and late clinical results after valve replacement with the St Jude Medical valve prosthesis. , 1996, Circulation.

[18]  J. González-Juanatey,et al.  Influence of the size of aortic valve prostheses on hemodynamics and change in left ventricular mass: implications for the surgical management of aortic stenosis. , 1996, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[19]  P. Pibarot,et al.  The effect of prosthesis-patient mismatch on aortic bioprosthetic valve hemodynamic performance and patient clinical status. , 1996, The Canadian journal of cardiology.

[20]  Y. Kawashima,et al.  Prediction of postoperative exercise tolerance after aortic valve replacement. , 1994, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[21]  A. Labovitz,et al.  Prosthetic Valves for the Small Aortic Root , 1994, Journal of cardiac surgery.

[22]  W. Edwards,et al.  New observations on the etiology of aortic valve disease: a surgical pathologic study of 236 cases from 1990. , 1993, Human pathology.

[23]  William A. Zoghbi,et al.  Doppler Echocardiographic Assessment of the St. Jude Medical Prosthetic Valve in the Aortic Position Using the Continuity Equation , 1991, Circulation.

[24]  A. Hoffmann,et al.  Patients at risk for cardiac death late after aortic valve replacement. , 1990, American heart journal.

[25]  R. Woodruff,et al.  Rest and exercise evaluation of St. Jude Medical and Medtronic Hall prostheses. Influence of primary lesion, valvular type, valvular size, and left ventricular function. , 1989, Circulation.

[26]  S. Rahimtoola,et al.  The problem of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch. , 1978, Circulation.

[27]  A. Pipe,et al.  Late incidence and predictors of persistent or recurrent heart failure in patients with mitral prosthetic valves. , 2004, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[28]  A. Pipe,et al.  Late incidence and predictors of persistent or recurrent heart failure in patients with aortic prosthetic valves. , 2004, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[29]  M. De Carlo,et al.  Clinical outcome in patients with 19-mm and 21-mm St. Jude aortic prostheses: comparison at long-term follow-up. , 2002, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[30]  J. Seward,et al.  Outcome of reoperation for aortic valve prosthesis-patient mismatch. , 2001, The American journal of cardiology.

[31]  H. Schaff,et al.  Influence of prosthesis size on change in left ventricular mass following aortic valve replacement. , 1994, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[32]  H. Matsuda,et al.  An appraisal of patch enlargement of the small aortic annulus in 33 patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. , 1992, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[33]  C. Mackenzie,et al.  A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. , 1987, Journal of chronic diseases.