Hemodynamic comparison of second- and third-generation stented bioprostheses in aortic valve replacement.
BACKGROUND
The hemodynamic performance of aortic replacement prostheses is of extreme importance. There is renewed interest in hemodynamics because of the influence of prosthesis-patient mismatch on left ventricular mass regression and the potential influence on survival.


METHODS
The hemodynamic performance of the second-generation Carpentier-Edwards supraannular porcine and pericardial (Perimount) bioprostheses and the 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 cm2/M2 was considered as lack of prosthesis-patient mismatch. The study group included included 53 patients with Carpentier-Edwards supraannular porcine, 48 with pericardial, and 98 with Medtronic Mosaic porcine bioprostheses.


RESULTS
The mean gradients were not different between the prostheses by prosthesis size. The Medtronic Mosaic was not provided in size 19. The mean gradients for the prostheses, except in the very large sizes, were all double-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 and pericardial bioprostheses in the aortic position.
Jamieson
W R
WR
Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. wrej@interchange.ubc.ca
Janusz
M T
MT
MacNab
J
J
Henderson
C
C
D001021:Aortic Valve / Q000601:surgery*; D001705:Bioprosthesis; D004452:Echocardiography; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006350:Heart Valve Prosthesis; D006439:Hemodynamics / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000401:mortality / Q000503:physiopathology*; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D011475:Prosthesis Failure; D017755:Prosthesis Fitting; D015607:Stents; D015996:Survival Rate