Small Aortic Annulus in Aortic Valve Replacement; Comparison between Aortic Annular Enlargement Group and Patient-prosthesis Mismatch Group / 대한흉부외과학회지

BACKGROUND: The effect of patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) on the clinical outcome following aortic valve replacement (AVR) remains controversial. This study compared the surgical outcomes of AVR between patients with a patient-prosthesis mismatch and those having undergone an aortic annular enlargement. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Six hundred and twenty seven adult patients, who underwent AVR with stented bioprosthetic or mechanical valves, between January 1996 and February 2006, were evaluated. PPM was defined as an indexed effective orifice area (iEOA) < or =0.85 cm2/m2, and severe if the iEOA < or =0.65 cm2/m2. PPM was present in 103 (16.4%, PPM group) patients, and severe in 11 (1.8%, SPPM group). During the period of the study, 21 patients underwent an AVR with annular enlargement (AE group). RESULT: The mean iEOA of the AE group was larger than that of the PPM group (0.95 vs. 0.76 cm2/m2, p=0.00). The AE group had longer CPB, ACC and operation times than the PPM group, and showed a tendency toward higher operative mortality (14.3% vs. 2.9%, p=0.06). The SPPM group had higher AV pressure gradients (peak/mean) than the AE group (72/45 mmHg vs. 38/25 mmHg, p=0.02/0.06) and suffered more AV related events (AV reoperation or severe aortic stenosis)(45.5% vs. 9.5%, p=0.03). LV masses were not regressed in the patients who experienced an AV related event. CONCLUSION: During AVR in patients with a small aortic annulus, annular enlargement should be carefully applied taking into account the high risk of operative mortality due to annular enlargement and co-morbidities of patients. Aortic annular enlargement; however, should be considered as an alternative method in patients expected to have a severe PPM after an AVR.

Midterm results of aortic root enlargement with AVR in patients with narrow aortic root and AS / 대한흉부외과학회지

BACKGROUND: For AVR using conventional prosthetic valves in adult patients with a narrow aortic root, aortic root enlargement is necessary to reduce postoperative pressure gradient across the aortic valve (deltaP). An evaluation of early and mid-term results of aortic root enlargement with AVR and echocardiographic follow up of deltaP and left ventricular function was performed. METHOD: From Aug. 1991 to Feb. 1998, eighteen patients aged 17 to 59 years(mean, 38+/-12 years) underwent Manouguian procedure with AVR. Aortic annular circumstance was enlarged 10.0mm to 18.0mm(mean, 12.6+/-6.3mm). Eight patients(44.0%) had NYHA class III status before operation, and seven cases of them underwent concomitant MVR. Valve pathology was ASr in 6 cases, AS in 4 cases, nd ASr+MSr in 8 cases. Replaced valve size was 21mm in 8 cases and 23 mm in 10 cases, and St. Jude Medical mechanical valve was used in 10 cases and Carbomedics in 8 cases. RESULT: Follow-up duration was 6 to 57 months (mean, 26+/-18 months), and total follow-up was 287 patient-year. There were one hospital death and one late death, therefore, actuarial survival rate was 85.7% at 56 months. Peak deltaP wad decreased significantly at postoperative mid-term period as 13+/-5mmHg, compared with thepreoperative one (42+/-8mmHg) (p<0.01). LVM(gm/m(2)) was also diminished as 35.8%(115+/-36gm/m(2))at postoperative mid-term period, compared with preoperative one (179+/-56gm/m(2))(p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There were no specific complications related to the procedure. And we could have adequate enlargement of aortic annulus to suitable prosthetic valve that have no effect of patient-prosthese mismatch.