Accès libre

Aortic patient-prosthesis mismatch - does it matter? A review for cardiologists and cardiac surgeons

Alexandru C Visan

Alexandru C Visan

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, James Cook University Hospital, South Tees NHS Foundation TrustMiddlesbrough, United Kingdom
Recherchez cet auteur sur
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Visan, Alexandru C
, 
Alexandru Zlibut

Alexandru Zlibut

Department of Cardiology, Emergency Clinical HospitalBucharest, Romania
Recherchez cet auteur sur
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Zlibut, Alexandru
, 
Adrian Ionescu

Adrian Ionescu

Department of Cardiology, Morriston Cardiac Centre, Swansea Bay University Health BoardSwansea, United Kingdom
Recherchez cet auteur sur
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Ionescu, Adrian
 et 
Serban C Stoica

Serban C Stoica

Department of Adult and Paediatric Cardiac Surgery, Bristol Heart Institute, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation TrustBristol, United Kingdom
Recherchez cet auteur sur
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Stoica, Serban C
  
29 sept. 2024
Aortic patient-prosthesis mismatch - does it matter? A review for cardiologists and cardiac surgeons's Cover Image
À propos de cet article
Article précédent
Article suivant
Citez
Télécharger la couverture
Catégorie d'article: Review
Publié en ligne: 29 sept. 2024
Pages: 107 - 121
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/rjc-2024-0001
Mots clés
© 2024 Alexandru C Visan et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Figure 1

Dimensions of surgical aortic prosthetic valves. (I) Tissue valves. (II) Bileaflet mechanical valves. (A) Overall profile height; (B) outflow tract profile height; (C) internal orifice diameter; (D) internal diameter/internal stent diameter; (E) external stent/housing diameter; (F) external sewing ring diameter. From Durko AP, Head SJ, Pibarot P, et al. Characteristics of surgical prosthetic heart valves and problems around labeling: A document from the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)—The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS)—American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS) Valve Labelling Task Force. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;158(4):1041–1054. doi:10.1016/J.JTCVS.2019.04.001. Copyright © 2019 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, The American Association for Thoracic Surgery, and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery.
Dimensions of surgical aortic prosthetic valves. (I) Tissue valves. (II) Bileaflet mechanical valves. (A) Overall profile height; (B) outflow tract profile height; (C) internal orifice diameter; (D) internal diameter/internal stent diameter; (E) external stent/housing diameter; (F) external sewing ring diameter. From Durko AP, Head SJ, Pibarot P, et al. Characteristics of surgical prosthetic heart valves and problems around labeling: A document from the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)—The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS)—American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS) Valve Labelling Task Force. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;158(4):1041–1054. doi:10.1016/J.JTCVS.2019.04.001. Copyright © 2019 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, The American Association for Thoracic Surgery, and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery.

Figure 2

Relative risk ratio for short-term mortality according to valve prosthesis-patient mismatch and preoperative LV ejection fraction. Numbers above the bars indicate the relative risk ratio for mortality compared with the group with nonsignificant mismatch and normal LV ejection fraction. Reproduced with permission from Blais C, Dumesnil JG, Baillot R, Simard S, Doyle D, Pibarot P. Impact of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch on short-term mortality after aortic valve replacement. Circulation. 2003;108(8):983–988. doi:10.1161/01. CIR.0000085167.67105.32. Copyright © 2003, Wolters Kluwer Health
Relative risk ratio for short-term mortality according to valve prosthesis-patient mismatch and preoperative LV ejection fraction. Numbers above the bars indicate the relative risk ratio for mortality compared with the group with nonsignificant mismatch and normal LV ejection fraction. Reproduced with permission from Blais C, Dumesnil JG, Baillot R, Simard S, Doyle D, Pibarot P. Impact of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch on short-term mortality after aortic valve replacement. Circulation. 2003;108(8):983–988. doi:10.1161/01. CIR.0000085167.67105.32. Copyright © 2003, Wolters Kluwer Health

Figure 3

Moderate and severe PPM was associated with higher perioperative, 1-year, 5-year and 10-year mortality in a large meta-analysis in 2019. Reproduced with permission from Sá MPBDO, De Carvalho MMB, Sobral Filho DC, et al. Surgical aortic valve replacement and patient–prosthesis mismatch: a meta-analysis of 108 182 patients. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. 2019;56(1):44–54. doi:10.1093/EJCTS/EZY466. Copyright © 2019, © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery.
Moderate and severe PPM was associated with higher perioperative, 1-year, 5-year and 10-year mortality in a large meta-analysis in 2019. Reproduced with permission from Sá MPBDO, De Carvalho MMB, Sobral Filho DC, et al. Surgical aortic valve replacement and patient–prosthesis mismatch: a meta-analysis of 108 182 patients. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. 2019;56(1):44–54. doi:10.1093/EJCTS/EZY466. Copyright © 2019, © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery.

Figure 4

A simple algorithm for distinguishing the causes of abnormally high gradients across SAVRs. Reproduced with permission from Zoghbi WA, Chambers JB, Dumesnil JG, et al. Recommendations for evaluation of prosthetic valves with echocardiography and doppler ultrasound. Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography. 2009;22(9):975–1014. doi:10.1016/j.echo.2009.07.013. Copyright © 2009, Elsevier.
A simple algorithm for distinguishing the causes of abnormally high gradients across SAVRs. Reproduced with permission from Zoghbi WA, Chambers JB, Dumesnil JG, et al. Recommendations for evaluation of prosthetic valves with echocardiography and doppler ultrasound. Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography. 2009;22(9):975–1014. doi:10.1016/j.echo.2009.07.013. Copyright © 2009, Elsevier.

Figure 5

An example of ‘unavoidable’ PPMM in a large patient with a small LVOT. A: Preoperative measurement of the LVOT diameter in a male undergoing SAVR for severe bicuspid AS, demonstrating a small LVOT (1.9cm). Height 190cm, weight 110kg, BSA 2.41m2. B: Preoperative spectral Doppler interrogation of the AV, demonstrating severe AS (peak velocity 4.6m/s, AVA 0.62cm2).
An example of ‘unavoidable’ PPMM in a large patient with a small LVOT. A: Preoperative measurement of the LVOT diameter in a male undergoing SAVR for severe bicuspid AS, demonstrating a small LVOT (1.9cm). Height 190cm, weight 110kg, BSA 2.41m2. B: Preoperative spectral Doppler interrogation of the AV, demonstrating severe AS (peak velocity 4.6m/s, AVA 0.62cm2).

Figure 6

Examples of biological, both stented and rapid deployment valves, and mechanical valves currently used in aortic valve replacement.
Examples of biological, both stented and rapid deployment valves, and mechanical valves currently used in aortic valve replacement.

Figure 7

Authors’ opinion on the algorithm for the management of the patient presenting with severe aortic stenosis and at risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch (i.e., predicted iEOA ≤0.65cm2/m2 or ≤ 0.55cm2/m2 for obese patients – BMI ≥ 30kg/m2). ARR=Aortic root replacement, ARE=Aortic root enlargement, RDV=Rapid deployment valve, TAVR=Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. †The main absolute contraindications to the Ross operation are described in the section below96. *Other procedures include aortic valve neocuspidization or reconstruction83.
Authors’ opinion on the algorithm for the management of the patient presenting with severe aortic stenosis and at risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch (i.e., predicted iEOA ≤0.65cm2/m2 or ≤ 0.55cm2/m2 for obese patients – BMI ≥ 30kg/m2). ARR=Aortic root replacement, ARE=Aortic root enlargement, RDV=Rapid deployment valve, TAVR=Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. †The main absolute contraindications to the Ross operation are described in the section below96. *Other procedures include aortic valve neocuspidization or reconstruction83.

Figure 8

(A) Main two posterior ARE techniques. With the Manouguian technique (B), the incision is continued through the aortic annulus, at the commissure between the left coronary sinus and the noncoronary sinus and into the aortic-mitral continuity. This can be further extended into the anterior leaflet of the mitral valve to allow a higher degree of enlargement. Care must be taken to preserve the mitral valve leaflet and chordal attachments. With the Nicks technique (C), the aortotomy is continued across the aortic annulus in the nadir of the noncoronary sinus. Reproduced with permission from Grubb KJ. Aortic root enlargement during aortic valve replacement: Nicks and Manouguian techniques. Operative Techniques in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2015;20(3):206–218. doi:10.1053/J.OPTECHSTCVS.2016.02.004100. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc.
(A) Main two posterior ARE techniques. With the Manouguian technique (B), the incision is continued through the aortic annulus, at the commissure between the left coronary sinus and the noncoronary sinus and into the aortic-mitral continuity. This can be further extended into the anterior leaflet of the mitral valve to allow a higher degree of enlargement. Care must be taken to preserve the mitral valve leaflet and chordal attachments. With the Nicks technique (C), the aortotomy is continued across the aortic annulus in the nadir of the noncoronary sinus. Reproduced with permission from Grubb KJ. Aortic root enlargement during aortic valve replacement: Nicks and Manouguian techniques. Operative Techniques in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2015;20(3):206–218. doi:10.1053/J.OPTECHSTCVS.2016.02.004100. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc.

Figure 9

Technical Modifications of the Ross Procedure Aimed at Mitigating Late Autograft Dilatation and Insufficiency. (A) Autologous inclusion technique; (B) Dacron inclusion technique; (C) extra-aortic annuloplasty and interposition graft. Reproduced with permission from Mazine A, El-Hamamsy I, Verma S, et al. Ross procedure in adults for cardiologists and cardiac surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72(22):2761–2777. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.08.2200. Copyright © 2018 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier.
Technical Modifications of the Ross Procedure Aimed at Mitigating Late Autograft Dilatation and Insufficiency. (A) Autologous inclusion technique; (B) Dacron inclusion technique; (C) extra-aortic annuloplasty and interposition graft. Reproduced with permission from Mazine A, El-Hamamsy I, Verma S, et al. Ross procedure in adults for cardiologists and cardiac surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72(22):2761–2777. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.08.2200. Copyright © 2018 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier.

Classification of patient-prosthesis mismatch based on severity_ Values above represent the effective orifice of area indexed to the BSA (EOAi)

Severity of patient prosthesis-mismatch (based on iEOA)
Mild Moderate Severe
BMI < 30 kg/m2 > 0.85 cm2/m2 0.66 – 0.85 cm2/m2 ≤ 0.65 cm2/m2
BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 > 0.70 cm2/m2 0.56 – 0.70 cm2/m2 ≤ 0.55 cm2/m2

Proportion of patients with severe PPM after SAVR or TAVR, according to stroke volume index_ From Abbas AE, Ternacle J, Pibarot P, et al_ Impact of flow on prosthesis-patient mismatch following transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement_ Circ Cardiovasc Imaging_ 2021;14(8):E012364_ doi:10_1161/CIRCIMAGING_120_012364

SAVR Severe PPM (%)
normal flow 8
low flow 42
TAVR
normal flow 5
low flow 20

Impact of using manufacturer-predicted AVA, rather than continuity-measured, AVA on the prevalence of PPM, in SAVR and TAVR valves_ From Ternacle J, Pibarot P, Herrmann HC, et al_ Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch After aortic valve replacement in the PARTNER 2 trial and registry_ Cardiovascular Interventions_ 2021;14(13):1466–1477_ doi:10_1016/J_JCIN_2021_03_069

PPM prevalence (%)
SAVR Measured AVA Predicted AVA
Moderate PPM 31 28.4
Severe PPMT 23.6 1.2
TAVR
Moderate PPM 17 21
Severe PPM 0 0.1

For any given size label, the actual external diameter of the valve varies according to the model_ This is the reason why labelled size cannot be used as a surrogate for LVOT diameter in the continuity equation for calculating the aortic valve area (AVA)_ From Doenst T, Amorim PA, Al-Alam N, Lehmann S, Mukherjee C, Faerber G_ Where is the common sense in aortic valve replacement? A review of hemodynamics and sizing of stented tissue valves_ Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery_ 2011;142(5):1180—1187_ doi:10_1016/j_jtcvs_2011_05_007

Size label Valves External diameter (mm)
Epic Supra Mosaic Perimount Magna Mitroflow
19 – 25 25 26 24 21
21 25 27 27 29 26 24
23 27 29 30 31 28 26
25 29 31 33 33 30 28
27 31 33 36 35 32 32
Sizers
19 – 25 17 19 23 21
21 21 27 18.5 21 25 23
23 23 29 20.5 23 27 26
25 25 31 22.5 25 28.7 28
27 27 33 24 27 31 31
Langue:
Anglais
Périodicité:
4 fois par an
Sujets de la revue:
Médecine, Médecine clinique, Médecine interne, Cardiologie, Pédiatrie et médecine juvénile, Cardiologie pédiatrique, Chirurgie, Chirurgie cardiaque
RSS Feed de la revue