Left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement with 17-mm St Jude Medical mechanical prostheses in isolated aortic stenosis

Does the St. Jude Regent 17-mm Offer Better Outcomes Than the Hemodynamic Plus 17-mm Aortic Valve Mechanical Prothesis?

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study is to report the early and mid-term clinical and hemodynamic results of a prospective trial investigating the clinical performance of the St. Jude Medical Regent 17 mm (SJMR-17) versus St. Jude Medical Hemodynamic Plus 17 mm (SJMHP-17).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2000 and August 2013, 20 patients (Group I) with aortic valve (AV) stenosis underwent first time AV replacement with a SJMR-17 and nine patients (Group II) underwent AV replacement with a SJMHP-17. The mean follow-up was 58 ± 31 months.

RESULTS

There was one death in Group I. The end-diastolic IVS thickness and end-systolic posterior left ventricle (LV) wall thickness was reduced significantly in boths groups (p = 0.001 and p = 0.006 in Group I and p = 0.007 and p = 0.011 in Group II). The peak and mean transprosthesis gradients (P-TPG and M-TPG) were 29 ± 6.8 mmHg and 17.5 ± 4.5 mmHg in Group I, significantly lower than in Group II (55.2 ± 19.7 mmHg and 28.8 ± 7.7 mmHg). The postoperative left ventricular mass (LVM) and indexed left ventricular mass (LVMi) were reduced significantly in both groups versus the preoperative values. The postoperative LVMi was 114.5 ± 10.6 g/m(2) in Group I versus 127 ± 8 g/m(2) in Group II (p = 0.01). With dobutamine, heart rate, left ventricular ejection fraction, cardiac output, transprosthesis peak, and mean gradients increased significantly in both groups, however, the P-TPG and M-TPG were significantly higher in Group II (p = 0.026 and p = 0.022) despite a non-significant increase of the indexed effective orifice area.

CONCLUSIONS

The SJMR-17 can be employed with satisfactory postoperative clinical and hemodynamic outcomes in patients with small aortic annulus, especially in elderly patients offering better outcome than SJMHP-17.

A critical review of hemodynamic changes and left ventricular remodeling after surgical aortic valve replacement and percutaneous aortic valve replacement

The introduction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in clinical practice has widened options for symptomatic patients at high surgical risk; however, it is not known whether TAVR has equivalent or prolonged benefits in terms of left ventricular (LV) remodeling.

METHODS

To explore the relative hemodynamic benefits and postoperative LV remodeling associated with TAVR and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), we performed a critical review of the available literature. A total of 67 studies were included in this systematic review.

RESULTS

There is at least equivalent if not slightly superior hemodynamic performance of TAVR over SAVR, and TAVR showed lower prosthesis-patient mismatch compared with SAVR. However, LV mass appears to regress to a greater degree after SAVR compared with TAVR. Aortic regurgitation, paravalvular in particular, is more common after TAVR than SAVR, although it is rarely more than moderate in severity. Improvements in diastolic function and mitral regurgitation are reported in only a handful of studies each and could not be compared across prosthesis types.

CONCLUSIONS

The published data support the hemodynamic comparability of SAVR and TAVR, with the higher incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch in SAVR offset by higher incidence of paravalvular leak in TAVR. These results highlight the need for further studies focusing on hemodynamic changes after valve therapy.

Seventeen-millimeter St. Jude Medical Regent valve in patients with small aortic annulus: dose moderate prosthesis-patient mismatch matter?

Background

The study was designed to evaluate the effects of moderate prosthesis-patient mismatch (defined as 0.65 cm²/m² < indexed effective orifice area ≤ 0.85 cm²/m²) on midterm outcomes after isolated aortic valve replacement with a 17-mm St. Jude Medical Regent valve in a large series of patients, and to determine if these effects are influenced by patient confounding variables.

Methods

One-hundred and six patients with and without moderate prosthesis-patient mismatch early after implantation of a 17-mm Regent valve at aortic position were included. Both clinical and echocardiographic assessments were performed preoperatively, at discharge and during follow-up period (mean follow-up time 52.6 ± 11.9 months).

Results

The prevalence of moderate prosthesis-patient mismatch was documented in 46 patients (43.4%) at discharge. During the follow-up period, no difference in the regression of left ventricular mass, decrease of transvalvular pressure gradients, mortality and prosthesis-related complications was observed between patients with and without moderate prosthesis-patient mismatch. After adjustment for several risk factors, moderate prosthesis-patient mismatch was associated with increased midterm mortality in patients with baseline left ventricular ejection fraction < 50% (HR: 1.80, p = 0.02), but with normal prognosis in those with preserved LV function. Younger age (cut off value = 65 years) was not an independent predictor of increased midterm mortality and valve-related complications in patients with moderate prosthesis-patient mismatch.

Conclusions

Moderate prosthesis-patient mismatch after aortic valve replacement with a small mechanical prosthesis is associated with increased mortality and adverse events in patients with pre-existing left ventricular dysfunction. Selected patients with small aortic annulus can experience satisfactory clinical improvements and midterm survival after aortic valve replacement with a 17-mm Regent valve.

Replacement of the st jude medical regent valve in the aortic position with a continuous suture technique in the small aortic root

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to review the strategy of performing aortic valve replacement (AVR) by using the St. Jude Medical (SJM) Regent valve with a continuous suture technique in patients with a small aortic root.

METHODS

Forty-six patients with small aortic annulus underwent AVR by using 19 or 21 mm SJM Regent valves. There were 15 males and 31 females. The mean age of the patients was 51.8 ± 12.4 years. The aortic annular diameter was 20.2 ± 0.9 mm. AVR procedures were performed with continuous suture technique using SJM Regent valves under standard cardiopulmonary bypass. Echocardiaographic data were collected before operation, at discharge, and at a follow-up time, respectively.

RESULTS

The intraoperative course was uneventful and there was no operative mortality. The implanted SJM Regent valves consisted of 21 mm valves in 15 patients and 19 mm valves in 31 patients. Echocardiography at 5.6 ± 1.3 months after operation showed a significant increase in the mean effective orifice area index (0.97 ± 0.24 cm(2) /m(2) ), decrease in the mean and peak transvavluar pressure gradient (12.5 ± 5.9 and 22.3 ± 9.6 mmHg), and decrease in the mean left ventricular mass index (106 ± 41.3 g/m(2) ). Moderate prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) (effective orifice area index between 0.65 and 0.85 cm(2) /m(2) ) was present in three patients and no severe PPM (effective orifice area index <0.65 cm(2) /m(2) ) occurred at discharge and during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Replacement of SJM Regent valve with a continuous suture technique maybe a good option to prevent PPM in the aortic position.

Mid-term outcomes after aortic valve replacement with the 17-mm St. Jude Medical Regent valve

BACKGROUND

When aortic valve replacement (AVR) is performed in patients with a small aortic annulus, prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) is of concern. We investigated the mid-term outcomes of AVR with a 17-mm mechanical prosthesis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients with aortic stenosis underwent AVR with a 17-mm St. Jude Medical Regent prosthesis. Echocardiography was performed preoperatively, at discharge, and at follow-up (mean follow-up, 33 months). Patients were divided into 2 groups: with and without PPM at discharge. Between-group differences in postoperative variables, particularly survival, were analyzed. Overall hospital mortality was 2.6%. Actuarial 1- and 5-year survival rates were 95% and 79%, respectively. Diabetes and renal insufficiency were associated with long-term mortality. Freedom from major adverse valve-related cardiac events at 1 year and 5 years was 97.3% and 93.9%, respectively. Diabetes was shown to be an independent risk factor for major adverse valve-related cardiac events. Echocardiography 13 months after AVR showed a significant increase in mean effective orifice area index, decrease in mean left ventricular-aortic pressure gradient, and decrease in mean left ventricular mass index. PPM at discharge did not influence long-term survival or left ventricular mass regression.

CONCLUSIONS

The 17-mm Regent prosthesis provided satisfactory clinical and hemodynamic results. It is a reliable choice for patients with a small aortic annulus.

Aortic valve replacement with 17-mm St. Jude Medical Regent prosthetic valves for a small calcified aortic annulus in elderly patients

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of aortic valve replacement (AVR) performed with a 17-mm St. Jude Medical Regent prosthetic valve (17SJMR) for an aortic annulus ≤19 mm in elderly patients aged ≥65 years.

METHODS

Six female patients (age 73.0 ± 5.1 years, body surface area 1.43 ± 0.07 m²) underwent AVR between October 2005 and February 2008.

RESULTS

Peak transaortic pressure gradient, which was 80.8 ± 31.0 mmHg preoperatively, decreased to 31.0 ± 4.2 mmHg postoperatively (P < 0.01) and to 21.7 ± 1.5 mmHg long term (P < 0.01). The left ventricular mass index, which was 112.1 ± 10.6 g/m² preoperatively, also significantly decreased to 101.4 ± 15.0 g/m² postoperatively and to 88.3 ± 14.8 g/m² long term (P < 0.01). Subjective symptoms diminished in all patients, and neither mortality nor hemorrhagic complications occurred. The postoperative mean effective orifice area index was 0.91 ± 0.04 cm²/m².

CONCLUSION

A favorable outcome was obtained by aortic valve replacement with the 17SJMR. Patients showed improved postoperative hemodynamic performance without valve-related complications.

The 17-mm St. Jude Medical Regent valve is a valid option for patients with a small aortic annulus

BACKGROUND

When aortic valve replacement is performed in patients with a small aortic annulus, prosthesis-patient mismatch is of concern. Such prosthesis-patient mismatch may affect postoperative clinical status and survival. We investigated the outcomes of isolated aortic valve replacement performed with a 17-mm mechanical prosthesis in patients with aortic stenosis.

METHODS

Twenty-three patients with aortic stenosis (mean age, 74.6 +/- 6.3 years) underwent isolated aortic valve replacement with a 17-mm St. Jude Medical Regent prosthesis. Mean body surface area was 1.41 +/- 0.13 m(2). Preoperative echocardiography yielded a mean aortic valve area of 0.36 +/- 0.10 cm(2)/m(2), a mean left ventricular-aortic pressure gradient of 68.4 +/- 25.3 mm Hg, and a mean left ventricular mass index of 200 +/- 69 g/m(2).

RESULTS

There was no operative mortality, and there were no valve-related events. Echocardiography at 14.0 +/- 10.0 months after aortic valve replacement showed a significant increase in the mean effective orifice area index (0.95 +/- 0.24 cm(2)/m(2)), decrease in the mean left ventricular-aortic pressure gradient (17.4 +/- 8.2 mm Hg), and decrease in the mean left ventricular mass index (124 +/- 37 cm(2)/m(2)). Prosthesis-patient mismatch (effective orifice area index < 0.85 cm(2)/m(2)) was present in 8 patients at discharge. In these patients as well as in those without prosthesis-patient mismatch, the left ventricular mass index decreased remarkably during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Aortic valve replacement with a 17-mm Regent prosthesis appears to provide satisfactory clinical and hemodynamic results in patients with a small aortic annulus. Remarkable left ventricular mass regression during follow-up was achieved irrespective of the effective orifice area index at discharge.

Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis in the elderly: influence of prosthesis-patient mismatch on late survival and left ventricular mass regression

PURPOSE

Controversy still exists about the influence of prosthesis-patient mismatch on outcomes after aortic valve replacement in the elderly. Our aim was to evaluate the effect of prosthesis-patient mismatch on survival and the extent of left ventricular (LV) mass regression after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis in Japanese patients aged >or=65 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 84 patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis between 1986 and 2006 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups based on the definition of prosthesis-patient mismatch (indexed effective orifice area <or=0.85 cm(2)/m(2)), and long-term results were compared. The mean follow-up time was 4.5 +/- 4.5 years. In 49 patients, follow-up echocardiography was performed at least 6 months after surgery, and the extent of LV mass regression was analyzed according to the presence of a prosthesis-patient mismatch.

RESULTS

Eight years after surgery, there was no significant difference between patients with and without mismatch in terms of actuarial freedom from cardiac-related death (P = 0.159) or death from any valve-related events (P = 0.107). The postoperative transvalvular pressure gradients were not significantly different between the two groups, and significant absolute and relative LV mass regression were observed in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Although a moderate prosthesis-patient mismatch appeared to be tolerable, the criteria of prosthesis-patient mismatch may have to be reassessed for elderly Japanese patients.

Impact of Valve Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Long-Term Survival and Left Ventricular Mass Regression After Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY

The influence of prosthesis-patient mismatch on long-term results after aortic valve replacement remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of prosthesis-patient mismatch on survival and the extent of left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 146 patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis between 1990 and 2005. Prosthesis-patient mismatch was defined as an effective orifice area/body surface area <or=0.85 cm(2)/m(2). Mean follow-up was 4.5 +/- 3.3 years, with a total follow-up of 650.0 patient-years. In 108 patients, follow-up echocardiography was performed at least 6 months after surgery, and the extent of postoperative left ventricular mass regression was analyzed according to the presence of prosthesis-patient mismatch.

RESULTS

Ten years after surgery, there was no significant difference between patients with mismatch and those without mismatch in overall survival (p = 0.345), actuarial freedom from cardiac-related death (p = 0.576), and freedom from any valve-related mortality or morbidity (p = 0.614). Using multivariate analysis, PPM was not a predictor of late cardiac-related death or all deaths. Echocardiographic examination showed that left ventricular wall thickness and left ventricular mass was significantly decreased postoperatively in both groups. However, the absolute and relative left ventricular mass regression was significantly lower in patients with mismatch than in those without mismatch.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed no negative effects of prosthesis-patient mismatch on survival at 10 years after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis. However, the extent of left ventricular mass regression was significantly lower in patients with mismatch.

Aortic Valve Replacement With 17-mm St. Jude Medical Prostheses for a Small Aortic Root in Elderly Patients

BACKGROUND

There are few reports about the optimal prosthesis for elderly patients who have small aortic roots with an aortic annular size of less than 19 mm.

METHODS

From October 2004 to October 2006, 11 women aged 70 years or older (mean age, 74.9 +/- 3.5 years) underwent aortic valve replacement with a 17-mm Regent prosthesis (St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN), with the size determined using the manufacturer's sizer. Clinical status and the results of preoperative and postoperative echocardiography were evaluated.

RESULTS

The patients had a mean body surface area of 1.33 +/- 0.13 m2. Preoperative average New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class was 2.5 +/- 0.7. Preoperative echocardiography showed a mean indexed effective orifice area of 0.33 +/- 0.14 cm2/m2 and a left ventricular mass index of 175 +/- 63 g/m2. Seven patients underwent associated procedures. Postoperative ventilation time was 14 +/- 5.6 hours, and the intensive care unit stay was 1.0 +/- 0.4 days. No patients died perioperatively. The NYHA functional class improved to class I in 9 patients. No obstruction of valve opening was observed. A significant increase in the mean indexed effective orifice area (0.87 +/- 0.10 cm2/m2) and regression of left ventricular mass index were found (114 +/- 46 cm2/m2) on postoperative echocardiography.

CONCLUSIONS

Aortic valve replacement in elderly patients with small aortic roots (less than 19 mm) using a 17-mm Regent prosthesis showed satisfactory clinical and hemodynamic results.

Prosthesis–patient mismatch after aortic valve replacement predominantly affects patients with preexisting left ventricular dysfunction: Effect on survival, freedom from heart failure, and left ventricular mass regression

OBJECTIVE

The effect of prosthesis-patient mismatch on clinical outcome and left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement remains controversial. Data on whether the clinical effect of prosthesis-patient mismatch depends on left ventricular function at the time of aortic valve replacement are lacking. This study examined the long-term clinical and echocardiographic effects of prosthesis-patient mismatch in patients with and without left ventricular systolic dysfunction at the time of aortic valve replacement.

METHODS

Preoperative and serial postoperative echocardiograms were performed in 805 adults who underwent aortic valve replacement between 1990 and 2003 and who were subsequently followed up in a dedicated valve clinic (follow-up, mean +/- SD, 5.5 +/- 3.5 years; maximum, 14.2 years). Preoperative left ventricular function was defined as normal (ejection fraction > or =50%) in 548 patients and impaired (ejection fraction <50%) in 257 patients.

RESULTS

Patients with impaired preoperative left ventricular function and prosthesis-patient mismatch (indexed effective orifice area < or =0.85 cm2/m2) had a decreased overall late survival (hazard ratio, 2.8; P = .03), decreased freedom from heart failure symptoms or heart failure death (odds ratio of 5.1 at 3 years after aortic valve replacement; P = .009), and diminished left ventricular mass regression compared with patients with impaired preoperative left ventricular function and no prosthesis-patient mismatch. These effects of prosthesis-patient mismatch were not observed in patients with normal preoperative left ventricular function.

CONCLUSIONS

Prosthesis-patient mismatch at an indexed effective orifice area of 0.85 cm2/m2 or less after aortic valve replacement primarily affects patients with impaired preoperative left ventricular function and results in decreased survival, lower freedom from heart failure, and incomplete left ventricular mass regression. Patients with impaired left ventricular function represent a critical population in whom prosthesis-patient mismatch should be avoided at the time of aortic valve replacement.