Comparative evaluation of left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement: a prospective randomized analysis

  • Background: We assessed the hemodynamic performance of various prostheses and the clinical outcomes after aortic valve replacement, in different age groups. Methods: One-hundred-and-twenty patients with isolated aortic valve stenosis were included in this prospective randomized randomised trial and allocated in three age-groups to receive either pulmonary autograft (PA, n = 20) or mechanical prosthesis (MP, Edwards Mira n = 20) in group 1 (age < 55 years), either stentless bioprosthesis (CE Prima Plus n = 20) or MP (Edwards Mira n = 20) in group 2 (age 55-75 years) and either stentless (CE Prima Plus n = 20) or stented bioprosthesis (CE Perimount n = 20) in group 3 (age > 75). Clinical outcomes and hemodynamic performance were evaluated at discharge, six months and one year. Results: In group 1, patients with PA had significantly lower mean gradients than the MP (2.6 vs. 10.9 mmHg, p = 0.0005) with comparable left ventricular mass regression (LVMR). Morbidity included 1 stroke in the PA population and 1 gastrointestinal bleeding in the MP subgroup. In group 2, mean gradients did not differ significantly between both populations (7.0 vs. 8.9 mmHg, p = 0.81). The rate of LVMR and EF were comparable at 12 months; each group with one mortality. Morbidity included 1 stroke and 1 gastrointestinal bleeding in the stentless and 3 bleeding complications in the MP group. In group 3, mean gradients did not differ significantly (7.8 vs 6.5 mmHg, p = 0.06). Postoperative EF and LVMR were comparable. There were 3 deaths in the stented group and no mortality in the stentless group. Morbidity included 1 endocarditis and 1 stroke in the stentless compared to 1 endocarditis, 1 stroke and one pulmonary embolism in the stented group. Conclusions: Clinical outcomes justify valve replacement with either valve substitute in the respective age groups. The PA hemodynamically outperformed the MPs. Stentless valves however, did not demonstrate significantly superior hemodynamics or outcomes in comparison to stented bioprosthesis or MPs.

Download full text files

Export metadata

Metadaten
Author:Mirko Doss, Jeffrey P. Wood, Arndt Holger Kiessling, Anton Moritz
URN:urn:nbn:de:hebis:30:3-228096
URL:http://www.cardiothoracicsurgery.org/content/6/1/136
DOI:https://doi.org/doi:10.1186/1749-8090-6-136
ISSN:1749-8090
Parent Title (English):Journal of cardiothoracic surgery
Publisher:BioMed Central
Place of publication:London
Document Type:Article
Language:English
Date of Publication (online):2011/10/24
Date of first Publication:2011/10/13
Publishing Institution:Universitätsbibliothek Johann Christian Senckenberg
Release Date:2011/10/24
Tag:Aortic Valve Replacement; Left Ventricular Mass; Prospective randomized Analysis
Volume:6
Issue:136
Page Number:8
First Page:1
Last Page:8
Note:
© 2011 Doss et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
HeBIS-PPN:27861051X
Institutes:Medizin / Medizin
Dewey Decimal Classification:6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Sammlungen:Universitätspublikationen
Licence (German):License LogoCreative Commons - Namensnennung 2.0