Key result
Mitral bioprostheses have a significantly greater profile than mechanical valves, frequently causing left ventricular outflow tract obstruction, especially when the native mitral apparatus is preserved.
Why the study?
Does mitral valve replacement with bioprostheses compared to mechanical valves increase the risk of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction?
Does mitral valve replacement with bioprostheses compared to mechanical valves increase the risk of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This commentary highlights the ongoing risk of LVOT obstruction when using mitral bioprostheses, particularly if the native mitral valve apparatus is preserved.
Although repair is now the most preferred option for the treatment of mitral valve disease, especially regurgitation and in degenerative disease, mitral valve replacement (MVR) is often required. In this case, the choice of prosthesis is of paramount importance. Mechanical valves are low-profile and usually cause no problem with regard to flow in the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT). By contrast, bioprostheses are significantly greater profile, and LVOT obstruction is frequent. The problem is more frequent when bioprosthetic implantation is associated with preservation of the native mitral valve apparatus, which is believed to be associated with better left ventricular (LV) function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Manuel J. Antunes (2021) conducted an editorial in Mitral valve disease. Mitral bioprostheses vs. Mechanical valves was evaluated on Left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction. Mitral bioprostheses have a significantly greater profile than mechanical valves, frequently causing left ventricular outflow tract obstruction, especially when the native mitral apparatus is preserved.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: