Key result
Severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (indexed effective orifice area <0.65 cm2/m2) negatively impacts long-term survival after aortic valve replacement, while TAVI is associated with a lower prevalence of mismatch compared to surgical replacement.
Why the study?
The treatment strategy for aortic stenosis has been changing due to new valvular prostheses and TAVI, requiring evaluation of prosthesis-patient mismatch in this context.
Does TAVI improve indexed effective orifice area and reduce prosthesis-patient mismatch compared to SAVR in patients with aortic stenosis?
Does TAVI improve indexed effective orifice area and reduce prosthesis-patient mismatch compared to SAVR in patients with aortic stenosis?
TAVI provides a larger indexed effective orifice area compared to SAVR, which may help avoid severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (IEOA <0.65 cm2/m2) that negatively impacts long-term survival.
OBJECTIVE: The treatment strategy for aortic stenosis (AS) has been changing due to newly developed valvular prostheses and trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). To determine the role of new modalities for AS with a small aortic root, papers using the concept of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) were reviewed. METHODS: First, to determine the cut-off value of the indexed effective orifice area (IEOA) for defining PPM, the studies of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with a follow-up longer than 5 years and a patient number larger than 500 were reviewed. Second, the papers comparing TAVI and SAVR were reviewed. Furthermore, the prevalence of PPM was reviewed, with the addition of papers on aortic root enlargement, sutureless AVR, and aortic valve reconstruction with autologous pericardium. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The results of the long-term survival after aortic valve replacement (AVR) have indicated that an IEOA less than 0.65 cm(2)/m(2) should be avoided in all cases, whereas the indications for patients with an IEOA between 065 and 0.85 cm(2)/m(2) should be determined by considering multiple factors. A large body size and younger age have a significantly negative influence on the long-term survival. In Asian population, the prevalence of PPM was low, despite the fact that the size of the aortic annulus was small. The IEOA after TAVI was larger than after surgical AVR in population-matched studies. To evaluate the role of TAVI and other modalities for a small aortic root, studies with a longer follow-up and larger volume are thus warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shigeki Morita (2016) conducted a review in Aortic stenosis. Trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vs. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) was evaluated on Long-term survival and prevalence of prosthesis-patient mismatch. Severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (indexed effective orifice area <0.65 cm2/m2) negatively impacts long-term survival after aortic valve replacement, while TAVI is associated with a lower prevalence of mismatch compared to surgical replacement.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: