Hemodynamic comparison of second- and third-generation stented bioprostheses in aortic valve replacement

Jamieson, WRE Janusz, MT MacNab, J Henderson, C

Wre. Jamieson et al., Hemodynamic comparison of second- and third-generation stented bioprostheses in aortic valve replacement, ANN THORAC, 71(5), 2001, pp. S282-S284

18

INGLESE

Article

Cardiovascular & Respiratory Systems","Medical Research Diagnosis & Treatment

ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY

0003-4975 → ACNP

71

5

2001

S

S282 - S284

ISI

0003-4975(200105)71:5<S282:HCOSAT>2.0.ZU;2-7

Background. The hemodynamic performance of aortic replacement prostheses is of extreme importance. There is renewed interest in hemodynamics because o f the influence of prosthesis-patient mismatch on left ventricular mass reg ression and the potential influence on survival. Methods. The hemodynamic performance of the second-generation Carpentier-Ed wards supraannular porcine and pericardial (Perimount) bioprostheses and th e third-generation Medtronic Mosaic porcine bioprosthesis were compared for mean gradient and effective orifice area index. The effective orifice area index of at least 0.85 cm(2)/M-2 was considered as lack of prosthesis-pati ent mismatch. The study group included included 53 patients with Carpentier -Edwards supraannular porcine, 48 with pericardial, and 98 with Medtronic M osaic porcine bioprostheses. Results. The mean gradients were not different between the prostheses by pr osthesis size. The Medtronic Mosaic was not provided in size 19. The mean g radients for the prostheses, except in the very large sizes, were all doubl e-digit values. The effective orifice area index was not different between the prostheses but there was a trend toward prosthesis-patient mismatch in smaller size prostheses. Conclusions. There was no apparent hemodynamic advantage between porcine an d pericardial bioprostheses in the aortic position. (C) 2001 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons.