{"title":"使用 Mosaic Ultra 生物假体进行主动脉瓣置换术后假体与患者的不匹配。","authors":"Vasileios Ntinopoulos, Hector Rodriguez Cetina Biefer, Stak Dushaj, Laura Rings, Philine Fleckenstein, Omer Dzemali, Achim Haeussler","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1768033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong> 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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> 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 cm<sup>2</sup>/m<sup>2</sup>), moderate (EOAi 0.65-0.85 cm<sup>2</sup>/m<sup>2</sup>), and absent/mild PPM (EOAi > 0.85 cm<sup>2</sup>/m<sup>2</sup>). In-hospital postoperative outcomes and the impact of PPM on mean transvalvular pressure gradient after stratification by prosthesis size were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> 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 (<i>p</i> < 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, <i>p</i> < 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 (<i>p</i> < 0.0001), observing gradually increasing gradients with decreasing prosthesis sizes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> 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.</p>","PeriodicalId":23057,"journal":{"name":"Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon","volume":" ","pages":"197-204"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch after Aortic Valve Replacement with the Mosaic Ultra Bioprosthesis.\",\"authors\":\"Vasileios Ntinopoulos, Hector Rodriguez Cetina Biefer, Stak Dushaj, Laura Rings, Philine Fleckenstein, Omer Dzemali, Achim Haeussler\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0043-1768033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong> 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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> 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 cm<sup>2</sup>/m<sup>2</sup>), moderate (EOAi 0.65-0.85 cm<sup>2</sup>/m<sup>2</sup>), and absent/mild PPM (EOAi > 0.85 cm<sup>2</sup>/m<sup>2</sup>). In-hospital postoperative outcomes and the impact of PPM on mean transvalvular pressure gradient after stratification by prosthesis size were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> 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 (<i>p</i> < 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, <i>p</i> < 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 (<i>p</i> < 0.0001), observing gradually increasing gradients with decreasing prosthesis sizes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> 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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"197-204\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1768033\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/4/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1768033","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
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.
期刊介绍:
The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon publishes articles of the highest standard from internationally recognized thoracic and cardiovascular surgeons, cardiologists, anesthesiologists, physiologists, and pathologists. This journal is an essential resource for anyone working in this field.
Original articles, short communications, reviews and important meeting announcements keep you abreast of key clinical advances, as well as providing the theoretical background of cardiovascular and thoracic surgery. Case reports are published in our Open Access companion journal The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon Reports.