Rishab Agarwal, AlleaBelle Bradshaw, Michelle Carvajal, Jennifer S Lawton
{"title":"Complicated third sternotomy for left ventricular outflow tract obstruction secondary to mitral valve prosthesis strut.","authors":"Rishab Agarwal, AlleaBelle Bradshaw, Michelle Carvajal, Jennifer S Lawton","doi":"10.21542/gcsp.2026.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction</b>: LVOT obstruction after surgical bioprosthetic MVP placement is uncommon and the influence of the MVP strut width has seldom been examined. <b>Case presentation</b>: A 74-year-old female presented with palpitations, chest pain, and shortness of breath. She had MVR with 31-mm bioprosthetic valve 2 years prior. TEE confirmed LVOT obstruction secondary to a MVP strut, causing a peak gradient of 55 mmHg. The redo operation was complicated by iatrogenic Type A aortic dissection. The patient was immediately cooled for DHCA with RCP and ascending aortic replacement was performed. MVR was then performed with a prosthesis with narrower strut width. Recovery after surgery was uneventful and post-bypass TEE confirmed absence of LVOT obstruction (gradient of 4 mmHg). <b>Discussion</b>: This case is of interest for two reasons. Primarily, the overall profile of the valve, including the width of the struts may play a significant role in the development of LVOT obstruction after MVR. Additionally, the patient had an ITAAD requiring prompt and thoughtful management. <b>Conclusions</b>: This case underscores the importance of evaluating MVP profile in relation to patient anatomy. Furthermore, intraoperative Type A aortic dissection is a rare but lethal phenomenon requiring swift decision-making and technical ability, and both are important considerations for trainees.</p>","PeriodicalId":12669,"journal":{"name":"Global Cardiology Science & Practice","volume":"2026 2","pages":"e202613"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13197850/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Cardiology Science & Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21542/gcsp.2026.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: LVOT obstruction after surgical bioprosthetic MVP placement is uncommon and the influence of the MVP strut width has seldom been examined. Case presentation: A 74-year-old female presented with palpitations, chest pain, and shortness of breath. She had MVR with 31-mm bioprosthetic valve 2 years prior. TEE confirmed LVOT obstruction secondary to a MVP strut, causing a peak gradient of 55 mmHg. The redo operation was complicated by iatrogenic Type A aortic dissection. The patient was immediately cooled for DHCA with RCP and ascending aortic replacement was performed. MVR was then performed with a prosthesis with narrower strut width. Recovery after surgery was uneventful and post-bypass TEE confirmed absence of LVOT obstruction (gradient of 4 mmHg). Discussion: This case is of interest for two reasons. Primarily, the overall profile of the valve, including the width of the struts may play a significant role in the development of LVOT obstruction after MVR. Additionally, the patient had an ITAAD requiring prompt and thoughtful management. Conclusions: This case underscores the importance of evaluating MVP profile in relation to patient anatomy. Furthermore, intraoperative Type A aortic dissection is a rare but lethal phenomenon requiring swift decision-making and technical ability, and both are important considerations for trainees.