Patient-prosthesis mismatch in patients with aortic valve replacement

17Citations
Citations of this article
37Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: Patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) may affect clinical outcomes in patients with aortic valve replacement (AVR). We retrospectively examined the PPM in patients with isolated AVR in the Japan Adult Cardiovascular Surgery Database (JACVSD). Methods: We examined all patients with isolated AVR between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009. The JACVSD data collection form has a total of 255 variables. We defined PPM as an effective orifice area index of ≤0.85 m2/cm2. Results: PPM was observed in 306 of 3,609 cases analyzed, PPM rate was 8.5 %. Body surface area was larger and body mass index was higher in the PPM group than the non-PPM group (P < 0.001). Patients with PPM were older (P = 0.001) and had a higher prevalence of diabetes (P = 0.004), dyslipidemia (P < 0.001), hypertension (P < 0.001), cerebrovascular disease (P = 0.031), old myocardial infarction (P = 0.006), previous percutaneous coronary artery intervention (P = 0.001), coronary artery disease (P = 0.018), and aortic valve stenosis (P < 0.001). Perioperative blood transfusion (P < 0.001) and dialysis (P = 0.005) were more frequent in the PPM group. Postoperative ventilation (P = 0.004) and intensive care unit stay (P = 0.004) were significantly longer in the PPM group. Conclusions: Age, aortic valve stenosis, dyslipidemia, hypertension, old myocardial infarction, previous percutaneous coronary artery intervention, diabetes mellitus, cerebrovascular disease, and high body mass index were the risk factors for PPM. PPM was not an independent risk factor for short-term mortality. © 2013 The Author(s).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kaminishi, Y., Misawa, Y., Kobayashi, J., Konishi, H., Miyata, H., Motomura, N., & Takamoto, S. I. (2013). Patient-prosthesis mismatch in patients with aortic valve replacement. General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 61(5), 274–279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11748-013-0216-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free