Cargando…

Early Doppler-echocardiography evaluation of Carpentier-Edwards Standard and Carpentier-Edwards Magna aortic prosthetic valve: comparison of hemodynamic performance

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to describe Doppler-echocardiography values of Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Standard (CEPS) and Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna (CEPM) aortic prosthetic valves, evaluated by a single, experienced echo-laboratory, early in the postoperative phase. METHODS: Three...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Minardi, Giovanni, Pulignano, Giovanni, Del Sindaco, Donatella, Sordi, Martina, Pavaci, Herribert, Pergolini, Amedeo, Zampi, Giordano, Moschella Orsini, Francesca, Gaudio, Carlo, Musumeci, Francesco
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3251522/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22114985
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-7120-9-37
_version_ 1782220528526819328
author Minardi, Giovanni
Pulignano, Giovanni
Del Sindaco, Donatella
Sordi, Martina
Pavaci, Herribert
Pergolini, Amedeo
Zampi, Giordano
Moschella Orsini, Francesca
Gaudio, Carlo
Musumeci, Francesco
author_facet Minardi, Giovanni
Pulignano, Giovanni
Del Sindaco, Donatella
Sordi, Martina
Pavaci, Herribert
Pergolini, Amedeo
Zampi, Giordano
Moschella Orsini, Francesca
Gaudio, Carlo
Musumeci, Francesco
author_sort Minardi, Giovanni
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to describe Doppler-echocardiography values of Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Standard (CEPS) and Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna (CEPM) aortic prosthetic valves, evaluated by a single, experienced echo-laboratory, early in the postoperative phase. METHODS: Three-hundred-seventy-seven consecutive patients, who had had a CEPS or a CEPM implanted in our Hospital due to aortic stenosis and/or insufficiency, underwent baseline Doppler echocardiography evaluation within 7 days after surgery. Hemodynamic performances of CEPS and CEPM were accurately described, evaluating flow-dependent (transprosthetic velocities and gradients) and flow-independent (effective orifice area, indexed effective orifice area and Doppler velocity index) Doppler-echocardiography parameters. RESULTS: Out of the 377 patients 48.8% were men (n = 184), mean age was 74.63 ± 6.77 years, mean BSA was 1.78 ± 0.18 m2, mean ejection fraction was 57.78 ± 8%. Two-hundred and sixty two CEPS and 115 CEPM were implanted. Comparing size-by-size CEPS with CEPM, both prostheses showed a good hemodynamic profile, with fairly similar values of pressure gradients (PGmax and mean, in mmHg, = 37,18 ± 11.57 and 20.81 ± 7.44 in CEPS n°19 compared to 32,47 ± 7,76 and 17,67 ± 4.63 in CEPM n°19 and progressively lower in higher sized prostheses, having PGmax and mean 15 ± 3,16 and 9.15 ± 1,29 in CEPS n°29 compared to 15,67 ± 1,53 and 9 ± 1 in CEPM n°29) and EOAi (being 0,65 ± 0,33 cm²/m² in CEPS n°19 compared to 0,77 ± 0,29 cm²/m² in CEPM n°19 and progressively higher in higher sized prostheses, being 1,28 ± 0,59 cm²/m² in CEPS n°29 compared to 1,07 ± 0,18 cm²/m² in CEPM n°29), the latter resulting, however, basically less flow obstructive. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm the good hemodynamic performance of both aortic bioprostheses and the more favourable hemodynamic profile of CEPM compared to CEPS, pointing out the need to perform routinely an accurate baseline Doppler-echocardiography evaluation early after surgery to allow an adequate interpretation of data at follow-up.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3251522
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32515222012-01-05 Early Doppler-echocardiography evaluation of Carpentier-Edwards Standard and Carpentier-Edwards Magna aortic prosthetic valve: comparison of hemodynamic performance Minardi, Giovanni Pulignano, Giovanni Del Sindaco, Donatella Sordi, Martina Pavaci, Herribert Pergolini, Amedeo Zampi, Giordano Moschella Orsini, Francesca Gaudio, Carlo Musumeci, Francesco Cardiovasc Ultrasound Research OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to describe Doppler-echocardiography values of Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Standard (CEPS) and Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna (CEPM) aortic prosthetic valves, evaluated by a single, experienced echo-laboratory, early in the postoperative phase. METHODS: Three-hundred-seventy-seven consecutive patients, who had had a CEPS or a CEPM implanted in our Hospital due to aortic stenosis and/or insufficiency, underwent baseline Doppler echocardiography evaluation within 7 days after surgery. Hemodynamic performances of CEPS and CEPM were accurately described, evaluating flow-dependent (transprosthetic velocities and gradients) and flow-independent (effective orifice area, indexed effective orifice area and Doppler velocity index) Doppler-echocardiography parameters. RESULTS: Out of the 377 patients 48.8% were men (n = 184), mean age was 74.63 ± 6.77 years, mean BSA was 1.78 ± 0.18 m2, mean ejection fraction was 57.78 ± 8%. Two-hundred and sixty two CEPS and 115 CEPM were implanted. Comparing size-by-size CEPS with CEPM, both prostheses showed a good hemodynamic profile, with fairly similar values of pressure gradients (PGmax and mean, in mmHg, = 37,18 ± 11.57 and 20.81 ± 7.44 in CEPS n°19 compared to 32,47 ± 7,76 and 17,67 ± 4.63 in CEPM n°19 and progressively lower in higher sized prostheses, having PGmax and mean 15 ± 3,16 and 9.15 ± 1,29 in CEPS n°29 compared to 15,67 ± 1,53 and 9 ± 1 in CEPM n°29) and EOAi (being 0,65 ± 0,33 cm²/m² in CEPS n°19 compared to 0,77 ± 0,29 cm²/m² in CEPM n°19 and progressively higher in higher sized prostheses, being 1,28 ± 0,59 cm²/m² in CEPS n°29 compared to 1,07 ± 0,18 cm²/m² in CEPM n°29), the latter resulting, however, basically less flow obstructive. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm the good hemodynamic performance of both aortic bioprostheses and the more favourable hemodynamic profile of CEPM compared to CEPS, pointing out the need to perform routinely an accurate baseline Doppler-echocardiography evaluation early after surgery to allow an adequate interpretation of data at follow-up. BioMed Central 2011-11-24 /pmc/articles/PMC3251522/ /pubmed/22114985 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-7120-9-37 Text en Copyright ©2011 Minardi et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 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.
spellingShingle Research
Minardi, Giovanni
Pulignano, Giovanni
Del Sindaco, Donatella
Sordi, Martina
Pavaci, Herribert
Pergolini, Amedeo
Zampi, Giordano
Moschella Orsini, Francesca
Gaudio, Carlo
Musumeci, Francesco
Early Doppler-echocardiography evaluation of Carpentier-Edwards Standard and Carpentier-Edwards Magna aortic prosthetic valve: comparison of hemodynamic performance
title Early Doppler-echocardiography evaluation of Carpentier-Edwards Standard and Carpentier-Edwards Magna aortic prosthetic valve: comparison of hemodynamic performance
title_full Early Doppler-echocardiography evaluation of Carpentier-Edwards Standard and Carpentier-Edwards Magna aortic prosthetic valve: comparison of hemodynamic performance
title_fullStr Early Doppler-echocardiography evaluation of Carpentier-Edwards Standard and Carpentier-Edwards Magna aortic prosthetic valve: comparison of hemodynamic performance
title_full_unstemmed Early Doppler-echocardiography evaluation of Carpentier-Edwards Standard and Carpentier-Edwards Magna aortic prosthetic valve: comparison of hemodynamic performance
title_short Early Doppler-echocardiography evaluation of Carpentier-Edwards Standard and Carpentier-Edwards Magna aortic prosthetic valve: comparison of hemodynamic performance
title_sort early doppler-echocardiography evaluation of carpentier-edwards standard and carpentier-edwards magna aortic prosthetic valve: comparison of hemodynamic performance
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3251522/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22114985
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-7120-9-37
work_keys_str_mv AT minardigiovanni earlydopplerechocardiographyevaluationofcarpentieredwardsstandardandcarpentieredwardsmagnaaorticprostheticvalvecomparisonofhemodynamicperformance
AT pulignanogiovanni earlydopplerechocardiographyevaluationofcarpentieredwardsstandardandcarpentieredwardsmagnaaorticprostheticvalvecomparisonofhemodynamicperformance
AT delsindacodonatella earlydopplerechocardiographyevaluationofcarpentieredwardsstandardandcarpentieredwardsmagnaaorticprostheticvalvecomparisonofhemodynamicperformance
AT sordimartina earlydopplerechocardiographyevaluationofcarpentieredwardsstandardandcarpentieredwardsmagnaaorticprostheticvalvecomparisonofhemodynamicperformance
AT pavaciherribert earlydopplerechocardiographyevaluationofcarpentieredwardsstandardandcarpentieredwardsmagnaaorticprostheticvalvecomparisonofhemodynamicperformance
AT pergoliniamedeo earlydopplerechocardiographyevaluationofcarpentieredwardsstandardandcarpentieredwardsmagnaaorticprostheticvalvecomparisonofhemodynamicperformance
AT zampigiordano earlydopplerechocardiographyevaluationofcarpentieredwardsstandardandcarpentieredwardsmagnaaorticprostheticvalvecomparisonofhemodynamicperformance
AT moschellaorsinifrancesca earlydopplerechocardiographyevaluationofcarpentieredwardsstandardandcarpentieredwardsmagnaaorticprostheticvalvecomparisonofhemodynamicperformance
AT gaudiocarlo earlydopplerechocardiographyevaluationofcarpentieredwardsstandardandcarpentieredwardsmagnaaorticprostheticvalvecomparisonofhemodynamicperformance
AT musumecifrancesco earlydopplerechocardiographyevaluationofcarpentieredwardsstandardandcarpentieredwardsmagnaaorticprostheticvalvecomparisonofhemodynamicperformance