title: Hemodynamic performance and incidence of patient-prosthesis mismatch of the complete supraannular perimount magna bioprosthesis in the aortic position.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Complete supraannular placement and smaller stent design allow the implantation of a Perimount Magna bioprosthesis with a larger inner diameter than that of a standard Perimount. This study compares the hemodynamic performance and the incidence of patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) of both prostheses.
  
  
  METHODS
  128 patients underwent aortic valve replacement, receiving either a Magna (n = 57) or a standard (n = 71) prosthesis. Inner aortic annulus diameter was measured intraoperatively by a hegar dilator to match echocardiographically obtained results to the annulus diameter instead of matching them to labelled valve size.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The Magna was significantly superior with respect to mean pressure gradient and effective orifice area in patients with an annulus diameter of 22-23 mm. In patients with an annulus diameter < 22 mm or > 23 mm, there was a non-significant trend towards superior hemodynamics in the Magna group. Severe PPM (effective orifice area index < or = 0.65 cm (2)/m (2)) was present in 11.1% (Magna) vs. 42.1% (Standard) of patients with an annulus diameter < 22 mm; in 0% (Magna) vs. 13.8% (Standard) with an annulus diameter of 22-23 mm; no PPM was seen in patients with annulus diameter > 23 mm in both groups.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The Perimount Magna had a significantly reduced incidence of patient-prosthesis mismatch and superior hemodynamics compared to the standard Perimount.
authors.affiliation: German Heart Center Munich, Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Munich, Germany. f.botzenhardt@gmx.de
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Botzenhardt
authors.forename: W B
authors.initials: WB
authors.lastname: Eichinger
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Guenzinger
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Bleiziffer
authors.forename: I
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: Wagner
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Bauernschmitt
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Lange
mesh_terms: D000367:Age Factors; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001022:Aortic Valve Insufficiency / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000401:mortality / Q000601:surgery*; D001024:Aortic Valve Stenosis / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000401:mortality / Q000601:surgery*; D001705:Bioprosthesis; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006350:Heart Valve Prosthesis; D019918:Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D006439:Hemodynamics / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000401:mortality; D011336:Probability; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D011475:Prosthesis Failure; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D012737:Sex Factors; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric; D015996:Survival Rate; D016896:Treatment Outcome