HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Luigi Di Tommaso Francesco Iorio Carlo Vosa Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mannacio, V. A. Articles by Vosa, C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Mannacio, V. A. Articles by Vosa, C. Related Collections Valve disease

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009;138:632-638
© 2009 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery

Acquired Cardiovascular Disease

Influence of prosthesis–patient mismatch on exercise-induced arrhythmias: A further aspect after aortic valve replacement

Department of Cardiac Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy

Received for publication July 30, 2008; revisions received December 3, 2008; accepted for publication January 19, 2009.

^_* Address for reprints: Vito Antonio Mannacio, MD, Via S. Domenico 62, 80127 Naples, Italy. (Email: vitomannacio2{at}libero.it).

Objectives: The influence of prosthesis–patient mismatch on outcome after aortic valve replacement is controversial. This study analyzed the impact of prosthesis–patient mismatch on survival, the extent of left ventricular mass, and physical capacity after replacement with a small-size prosthesis.

Patients and Methods: A total of 157 patients who underwent valve replacement for pure aortic stenosis were reviewed. Late mortality, morbidity, left ventricular mass regression, transprosthetic gradient at rest and after exercise, exercise capacity, and occurrence of arrhythmias were evaluated.

Results: Prosthesis–patient mismatch, defined as an indexed effective orifice area of 0.75 cm²/m² or more, occurred in 96 (61.1%) patients and had no significant impact on early and late mortality. The only independent predictor of mortality was age greater than 65 years. At follow-up, multivariate analysis of prosthetic gradient at rest of 35 mm Hg end exercise capacity or more revealed that both these evidences were associated with high left ventricular mass (P < .001), female gender (P < .001), and follow-up time (P < .001). Arrhythmias occurred during exercise in 34.1% of patients (40/117). Multivariate analysis of occurrence of arrhythmias revealed that they were associated with high mean transprosthetic gradients: values of 50 mm Hg or more during exercise had 95% sensitivity and 72% specificity for predicting arrhythmias.

Conclusion: Prosthesis–patient mismatch failed to demonstrate any significant impact on early and late mortality and morbidity and in left ventricular mass regression. High transprosthetic gradients influence exercise capacity and occurrence of arrhythmias.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				V. Mannacio, L. Di Tommaso, P. Stassano, V. De Amicis, and C. Vosa Myocardial metabolism and diastolic function after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: influence of patient-prosthesis mismatch Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, February 1, 2012; 41(2): 316 - 321. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]