Heart, Lung and Circulation
Volume 16, Issue 4 , Pages 260-264, August 2007

Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch is Associated with Higher Operative Mortality Following Aortic Valve Replacement

  • Cheng-Hon Yap, MS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, St. Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Fitzroy, Victoria 3065, Australia
    • Department of Surgery, St. Vincent's Hospital, University of Melbourne, Australia
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +61 3 9288 2211; fax: +61 3 9288 4616.
  • ,
  • Morteza Mohajeri, FRACS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Geelong Hospital, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia
  • ,
  • Michael Yii, FRACS, MS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, St. Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Fitzroy, Victoria 3065, Australia
    • Department of Surgery, St. Vincent's Hospital, University of Melbourne, Australia

Received 9 June 2006; received in revised form 9 January 2007; accepted 5 February 2007.

Background

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) occurs when the valve prosthesis implanted at surgery is too small in relation to patient's body size, causing high transvalvular gradients. We investigated if severe PPM is related to early morbidity and mortality after aortic valve replacement (AVR).

Methods

We analysed prospectively collected data of 701 consecutive patients undergoing AVR between June 2001 and February 2006 at two Australian public hospitals. The indexed valve effective orifice area (IEOA) was estimated for each valve prosthesis implanted. PPM was defined as ≤0.65cm2m−2. PPM was correlated with operative mortality, stroke, prolonged ventilation, new renal failure, prolonged intensive care stay, prolonged hospital stay and readmission to hospital within 30 days by univariate and multivariate methods.

Results

PPM was present in 6.6% of patients. Overall operative mortality was 4.1%. Isolated AVR was performed in only 38.4% of patients. For patients with PPM, the univariate and multivariate odds ratio for mortality were 5.2 (P=0.002) and 6.1 (P=0.006), respectively. The other multivariate predictors of mortality were age, pre-operative serum creatinine, emergency status, pulmonary artery pressure and bypass time. PPM was not associated with stroke, prolonged ventilation, new renal failure, prolonged intensive care or hospital stay, or readmission within 30 days.

Conclusion

PPM was associated with increased operative mortality. PPM should be avoided where possible as it may reduce operative mortality following AVR.

Keywords: Cardiac surgery, Mortality, Aortic valve surgery, Heart valve prosthesis

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1443-9506(07)00124-2

doi:10.1016/j.hlc.2007.02.082

Heart, Lung and Circulation
Volume 16, Issue 4 , Pages 260-264, August 2007