Prosthesis-patient mismatch affects long-term survival after mechanical valve replacement

Shun Kosaka, Shaulnie Mohan, Salim Virani, Vei Vei Lee, Ariadna Contreras, George J. Reul, Stephanie A. Coulter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

45 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: We sought to examine the relationship between the degree of prosthesis-patient mismatch and long-term survival after mechanical aortic valve replacement. Methods: Prospectively collected long-term follow-up data from 469 consecutive patients who underwent aortic valve replacement between 1995 and 1998 were reviewed. The indexed effective orifice area was derived from the reference normal values of effective orifice area divided by the patient's body surface area. Outcome was stratified according to the severity of prosthesis-patient mismatch: moderate mismatch was defined as 0.65 to 0.85 cm2/m2 and severe mismatch as less than 0.65 cm2/m2. The Cox proportional-hazards model with propensity score adjustment was used to adjust for the observed differences in baseline characteristics between the mismatch groups. Results: The degree of prosthesis-patient mismatch was minimal in 57% of patients, moderate in 39%, and severe in 4%. Predictors of clinically significant mismatch included small aortic valve sizes (19 and 21 mm), obesity, age greater than 65 years, and class III or IV heart failure. During a median follow-up period of approximately 7.9 years, overall survival was 77% in patients with minimal mismatch, 63% in those with moderate mismatch, and only 47% in those with severe mismatch (P < .001). Moderate or severe mismatch was a significant predictor of poorer survival (hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-2.3; P < .01), even after adjustment for all significant clinical predictors (ie, propensity score; hazard ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-1.5; P = .05). Conclusions: In a large aortic valve surgery population, prosthesis-patient mismatch occurred in 43% of patients, and those with significant mismatch had worse long-term outcomes than those with minimal mismatch.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1076-1080
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Volume135
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2008 May
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Prostheses and Implants
Survival
Aortic Valve
Propensity Score
Reference Values
Confidence Intervals
Body Surface Area
Proportional Hazards Models
Heart Failure
Obesity
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery

Cite this

Prosthesis-patient mismatch affects long-term survival after mechanical valve replacement. / Kosaka, Shun; Mohan, Shaulnie; Virani, Salim; Lee, Vei Vei; Contreras, Ariadna; Reul, George J.; Coulter, Stephanie A.

In: Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Vol. 135, No. 5, 05.2008, p. 1076-1080.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kosaka, Shun ; Mohan, Shaulnie ; Virani, Salim ; Lee, Vei Vei ; Contreras, Ariadna ; Reul, George J. ; Coulter, Stephanie A. / Prosthesis-patient mismatch affects long-term survival after mechanical valve replacement. In: Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2008 ; Vol. 135, No. 5. pp. 1076-1080.
@article{f82f61b989984304ae0666863d82292e,
title = "Prosthesis-patient mismatch affects long-term survival after mechanical valve replacement",
abstract = "Objective: We sought to examine the relationship between the degree of prosthesis-patient mismatch and long-term survival after mechanical aortic valve replacement. Methods: Prospectively collected long-term follow-up data from 469 consecutive patients who underwent aortic valve replacement between 1995 and 1998 were reviewed. The indexed effective orifice area was derived from the reference normal values of effective orifice area divided by the patient's body surface area. Outcome was stratified according to the severity of prosthesis-patient mismatch: moderate mismatch was defined as 0.65 to 0.85 cm2/m2 and severe mismatch as less than 0.65 cm2/m2. The Cox proportional-hazards model with propensity score adjustment was used to adjust for the observed differences in baseline characteristics between the mismatch groups. Results: The degree of prosthesis-patient mismatch was minimal in 57{\%} of patients, moderate in 39{\%}, and severe in 4{\%}. Predictors of clinically significant mismatch included small aortic valve sizes (19 and 21 mm), obesity, age greater than 65 years, and class III or IV heart failure. During a median follow-up period of approximately 7.9 years, overall survival was 77{\%} in patients with minimal mismatch, 63{\%} in those with moderate mismatch, and only 47{\%} in those with severe mismatch (P < .001). Moderate or severe mismatch was a significant predictor of poorer survival (hazard ratio, 1.6; 95{\%} confidence interval, 1.4-2.3; P < .01), even after adjustment for all significant clinical predictors (ie, propensity score; hazard ratio, 1.2; 95{\%} confidence interval, 1.0-1.5; P = .05). Conclusions: In a large aortic valve surgery population, prosthesis-patient mismatch occurred in 43{\%} of patients, and those with significant mismatch had worse long-term outcomes than those with minimal mismatch.",
author = "Shun Kosaka and Shaulnie Mohan and Salim Virani and Lee, {Vei Vei} and Ariadna Contreras and Reul, {George J.} and Coulter, {Stephanie A.}",
year = "2008",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.11.032",
language = "English",
volume = "135",
pages = "1076--1080",
journal = "Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery",
issn = "0022-5223",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prosthesis-patient mismatch affects long-term survival after mechanical valve replacement

AU - Kosaka, Shun

AU - Mohan, Shaulnie

AU - Virani, Salim

AU - Lee, Vei Vei

AU - Contreras, Ariadna

AU - Reul, George J.

AU - Coulter, Stephanie A.

PY - 2008/5

Y1 - 2008/5

N2 - Objective: We sought to examine the relationship between the degree of prosthesis-patient mismatch and long-term survival after mechanical aortic valve replacement. Methods: Prospectively collected long-term follow-up data from 469 consecutive patients who underwent aortic valve replacement between 1995 and 1998 were reviewed. The indexed effective orifice area was derived from the reference normal values of effective orifice area divided by the patient's body surface area. Outcome was stratified according to the severity of prosthesis-patient mismatch: moderate mismatch was defined as 0.65 to 0.85 cm2/m2 and severe mismatch as less than 0.65 cm2/m2. The Cox proportional-hazards model with propensity score adjustment was used to adjust for the observed differences in baseline characteristics between the mismatch groups. Results: The degree of prosthesis-patient mismatch was minimal in 57% of patients, moderate in 39%, and severe in 4%. Predictors of clinically significant mismatch included small aortic valve sizes (19 and 21 mm), obesity, age greater than 65 years, and class III or IV heart failure. During a median follow-up period of approximately 7.9 years, overall survival was 77% in patients with minimal mismatch, 63% in those with moderate mismatch, and only 47% in those with severe mismatch (P < .001). Moderate or severe mismatch was a significant predictor of poorer survival (hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-2.3; P < .01), even after adjustment for all significant clinical predictors (ie, propensity score; hazard ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-1.5; P = .05). Conclusions: In a large aortic valve surgery population, prosthesis-patient mismatch occurred in 43% of patients, and those with significant mismatch had worse long-term outcomes than those with minimal mismatch.

AB - Objective: We sought to examine the relationship between the degree of prosthesis-patient mismatch and long-term survival after mechanical aortic valve replacement. Methods: Prospectively collected long-term follow-up data from 469 consecutive patients who underwent aortic valve replacement between 1995 and 1998 were reviewed. The indexed effective orifice area was derived from the reference normal values of effective orifice area divided by the patient's body surface area. Outcome was stratified according to the severity of prosthesis-patient mismatch: moderate mismatch was defined as 0.65 to 0.85 cm2/m2 and severe mismatch as less than 0.65 cm2/m2. The Cox proportional-hazards model with propensity score adjustment was used to adjust for the observed differences in baseline characteristics between the mismatch groups. Results: The degree of prosthesis-patient mismatch was minimal in 57% of patients, moderate in 39%, and severe in 4%. Predictors of clinically significant mismatch included small aortic valve sizes (19 and 21 mm), obesity, age greater than 65 years, and class III or IV heart failure. During a median follow-up period of approximately 7.9 years, overall survival was 77% in patients with minimal mismatch, 63% in those with moderate mismatch, and only 47% in those with severe mismatch (P < .001). Moderate or severe mismatch was a significant predictor of poorer survival (hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-2.3; P < .01), even after adjustment for all significant clinical predictors (ie, propensity score; hazard ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-1.5; P = .05). Conclusions: In a large aortic valve surgery population, prosthesis-patient mismatch occurred in 43% of patients, and those with significant mismatch had worse long-term outcomes than those with minimal mismatch.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=42949100366&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=42949100366&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.11.032

DO - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.11.032

M3 - Article

C2 - 18455587

AN - SCOPUS:42949100366

VL - 135

SP - 1076

EP - 1080

JO - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

JF - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

SN - 0022-5223

IS - 5

ER -