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 (PP...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon 2005-08, Vol.53 (4), p.226-230 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 230 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 226 |
| container_title | The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon |
| container_volume | 53 |
| creator | Botzenhardt, F. Eichinger, W. B. Guenzinger, R. Bleiziffer, S. Wagner, I. Bauernschmitt, R. Lange, R. |
| description | 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 ≤ 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. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1055/s-2005-837678 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68062476</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>68062476</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-414136ab1186cab21145e2a23f75d14de1faf911866366cf1db5911c1e7b8f2c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUFv1DAQhS1ERZfCkSvyiRMGT-I4zrGsCq3UipVazpbjTFhXib3YzqF_pL8Xh12pJ07WeL55ejOPkA_AvwBvmq-JVZw3TNWtbNUrsgFRdww6Xr0mGw4tMCmq5py8TemRcxBKdW_IOUhet0qqDXm-xjkMT97MztIdxjHE2XiL1PiB3njrBlyrMNKdyQ59ZrsYUt5jconeuTSbbPdru3zRbZgPE2ak98shGuP9Mpm4qro5LD7TO_PbG_rNhcOLhvP_Ri9DzKuDkFx2wb8jZ6OZEr4_vRfk1_erh-01u_3542Z7ects3YnMBAiopekBlLSmrwBEg5Wp6rFtBhADwmjGbu3KWko7wtA3pbSAba_GytYX5NNRtzj6s2DKenbJ4jQZj2FJWiouK9HKArIjaIv1FHHUh7KViU8auF6D0EmvQehjEIX_eBJe-hmHF_p0-QJ8PgJ573BG_RiW6Muq_9H7C0rHlC0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>68062476</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Hemodynamic Performance and Incidence of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch of the Complete Supraannular Perimount Magna Bioprosthesis in the Aortic Position</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Thieme Connect Journals</source><creator>Botzenhardt, F. ; Eichinger, W. B. ; Guenzinger, R. ; Bleiziffer, S. ; Wagner, I. ; Bauernschmitt, R. ; Lange, R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Botzenhardt, F. ; Eichinger, W. B. ; Guenzinger, R. ; Bleiziffer, S. ; Wagner, I. ; Bauernschmitt, R. ; Lange, R.</creatorcontrib><description>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 ≤ 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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0171-6425</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1439-1902</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-837678</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16037868</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Germany</publisher><subject>Age Factors ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Aortic Valve Insufficiency - diagnosis ; Aortic Valve Insufficiency - mortality ; Aortic Valve Insufficiency - surgery ; Aortic Valve Stenosis - diagnosis ; Aortic Valve Stenosis - mortality ; Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery ; Bioprosthesis ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Heart Valve Prosthesis ; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects ; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - methods ; Hemodynamics - physiology ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Original Cardiovascular ; Postoperative Complications - mortality ; Probability ; Prospective Studies ; Prosthesis Design ; Prosthesis Failure ; Risk Assessment ; Severity of Illness Index ; Sex Factors ; Statistics, Nonparametric ; Survival Rate ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon, 2005-08, Vol.53 (4), p.226-230</ispartof><rights>Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-414136ab1186cab21145e2a23f75d14de1faf911866366cf1db5911c1e7b8f2c3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.thieme-connect.de/products/ejournals/pdf/10.1055/s-2005-837678.pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gthieme$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.thieme-connect.de/products/ejournals/html/10.1055/s-2005-837678$$EHTML$$P50$$Gthieme$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3004,3005,27901,27902,54534,54535</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16037868$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Botzenhardt, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eichinger, W. B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guenzinger, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bleiziffer, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wagner, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bauernschmitt, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lange, R.</creatorcontrib><title>Hemodynamic Performance and Incidence of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch of the Complete Supraannular Perimount Magna Bioprosthesis in the Aortic Position</title><title>The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon</title><addtitle>Thorac cardiovasc Surg</addtitle><description>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 ≤ 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.</description><subject>Age Factors</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Aortic Valve Insufficiency - diagnosis</subject><subject>Aortic Valve Insufficiency - mortality</subject><subject>Aortic Valve Insufficiency - surgery</subject><subject>Aortic Valve Stenosis - diagnosis</subject><subject>Aortic Valve Stenosis - mortality</subject><subject>Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery</subject><subject>Bioprosthesis</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Heart Valve Prosthesis</subject><subject>Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects</subject><subject>Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - methods</subject><subject>Hemodynamics - physiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Original Cardiovascular</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - mortality</subject><subject>Probability</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Prosthesis Failure</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><subject>Severity of Illness Index</subject><subject>Sex Factors</subject><subject>Statistics, Nonparametric</subject><subject>Survival Rate</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0171-6425</issn><issn>1439-1902</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUFv1DAQhS1ERZfCkSvyiRMGT-I4zrGsCq3UipVazpbjTFhXib3YzqF_pL8Xh12pJ07WeL55ejOPkA_AvwBvmq-JVZw3TNWtbNUrsgFRdww6Xr0mGw4tMCmq5py8TemRcxBKdW_IOUhet0qqDXm-xjkMT97MztIdxjHE2XiL1PiB3njrBlyrMNKdyQ59ZrsYUt5jconeuTSbbPdru3zRbZgPE2ak98shGuP9Mpm4qro5LD7TO_PbG_rNhcOLhvP_Ri9DzKuDkFx2wb8jZ6OZEr4_vRfk1_erh-01u_3542Z7ects3YnMBAiopekBlLSmrwBEg5Wp6rFtBhADwmjGbu3KWko7wtA3pbSAba_GytYX5NNRtzj6s2DKenbJ4jQZj2FJWiouK9HKArIjaIv1FHHUh7KViU8auF6D0EmvQehjEIX_eBJe-hmHF_p0-QJ8PgJ573BG_RiW6Muq_9H7C0rHlC0</recordid><startdate>20050801</startdate><enddate>20050801</enddate><creator>Botzenhardt, F.</creator><creator>Eichinger, W. B.</creator><creator>Guenzinger, R.</creator><creator>Bleiziffer, S.</creator><creator>Wagner, I.</creator><creator>Bauernschmitt, R.</creator><creator>Lange, R.</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20050801</creationdate><title>Hemodynamic Performance and Incidence of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch of the Complete Supraannular Perimount Magna Bioprosthesis in the Aortic Position</title><author>Botzenhardt, F. ; Eichinger, W. B. ; Guenzinger, R. ; Bleiziffer, S. ; Wagner, I. ; Bauernschmitt, R. ; Lange, R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-414136ab1186cab21145e2a23f75d14de1faf911866366cf1db5911c1e7b8f2c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Age Factors</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Aortic Valve Insufficiency - diagnosis</topic><topic>Aortic Valve Insufficiency - mortality</topic><topic>Aortic Valve Insufficiency - surgery</topic><topic>Aortic Valve Stenosis - diagnosis</topic><topic>Aortic Valve Stenosis - mortality</topic><topic>Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery</topic><topic>Bioprosthesis</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Heart Valve Prosthesis</topic><topic>Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects</topic><topic>Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - methods</topic><topic>Hemodynamics - physiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Original Cardiovascular</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - mortality</topic><topic>Probability</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Prosthesis Failure</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><topic>Severity of Illness Index</topic><topic>Sex Factors</topic><topic>Statistics, Nonparametric</topic><topic>Survival Rate</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Botzenhardt, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eichinger, W. B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guenzinger, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bleiziffer, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wagner, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bauernschmitt, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lange, R.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Botzenhardt, F.</au><au>Eichinger, W. B.</au><au>Guenzinger, R.</au><au>Bleiziffer, S.</au><au>Wagner, I.</au><au>Bauernschmitt, R.</au><au>Lange, R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Hemodynamic Performance and Incidence of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch of the Complete Supraannular Perimount Magna Bioprosthesis in the Aortic Position</atitle><jtitle>The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon</jtitle><addtitle>Thorac cardiovasc Surg</addtitle><date>2005-08-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>53</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>226</spage><epage>230</epage><pages>226-230</pages><issn>0171-6425</issn><eissn>1439-1902</eissn><abstract>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 ≤ 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.</abstract><cop>Germany</cop><pmid>16037868</pmid><doi>10.1055/s-2005-837678</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0171-6425 |
| ispartof | The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon, 2005-08, Vol.53 (4), p.226-230 |
| issn | 0171-6425 1439-1902 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68062476 |
| source | MEDLINE; Thieme Connect Journals |
| subjects | Age Factors Aged Aged, 80 and over Aortic Valve Insufficiency - diagnosis Aortic Valve Insufficiency - mortality Aortic Valve Insufficiency - surgery Aortic Valve Stenosis - diagnosis Aortic Valve Stenosis - mortality Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery Bioprosthesis Female Follow-Up Studies Heart Valve Prosthesis Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - methods Hemodynamics - physiology Humans Male Middle Aged Original Cardiovascular Postoperative Complications - mortality Probability Prospective Studies Prosthesis Design Prosthesis Failure Risk Assessment Severity of Illness Index Sex Factors Statistics, Nonparametric Survival Rate Treatment Outcome |
| title | Hemodynamic Performance and Incidence of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch of the Complete Supraannular Perimount Magna Bioprosthesis in the Aortic Position |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T04%3A11%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Hemodynamic%20Performance%20and%20Incidence%20of%20Patient-Prosthesis%20Mismatch%20of%20the%20Complete%20Supraannular%20Perimount%20Magna%20Bioprosthesis%20in%20the%20Aortic%20Position&rft.jtitle=The%20Thoracic%20and%20cardiovascular%20surgeon&rft.au=Botzenhardt,%20F.&rft.date=2005-08-01&rft.volume=53&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=226&rft.epage=230&rft.pages=226-230&rft.issn=0171-6425&rft.eissn=1439-1902&rft_id=info:doi/10.1055/s-2005-837678&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E68062476%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=68062476&rft_id=info:pmid/16037868&rfr_iscdi=true |