Cargando…

One-year hemodynamic comparison of Perimount Magna with St Jude Epic aortic bioprostheses

INTRODUCTION: Cardiac surgeons are using more bioprosthetic valves due to the ageing population as well as to improvements that have been made to these implants. We sought to compare the 1-year hemodynamics of two commercially available valves by echocardiographic parameters. MATERIAL AND METHODS: R...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bobiarski, Jerzy, Newcomb, Andrew E., Elhenawy, Abdelsalam M., Maganti, Manjula, Bos, Joanne, Hemeon, Suzanne, Rao, Vivek
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Termedia Publishing House 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3701989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23847665
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/aoms.2013.35479
_version_ 1782275739229356032
author Bobiarski, Jerzy
Newcomb, Andrew E.
Elhenawy, Abdelsalam M.
Maganti, Manjula
Bos, Joanne
Hemeon, Suzanne
Rao, Vivek
author_facet Bobiarski, Jerzy
Newcomb, Andrew E.
Elhenawy, Abdelsalam M.
Maganti, Manjula
Bos, Joanne
Hemeon, Suzanne
Rao, Vivek
author_sort Bobiarski, Jerzy
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Cardiac surgeons are using more bioprosthetic valves due to the ageing population as well as to improvements that have been made to these implants. We sought to compare the 1-year hemodynamics of two commercially available valves by echocardiographic parameters. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective review of our institutional database revealed 69 patients who received either Perimount Magna (n = 33) or St Jude Epic (n = 36) valves in the aortic position with no other valve surgery between June 2004 and March 2006. All patients received transthoracic echocardiography at 1 year. Comparisons between groups were made at baseline and at 1-year follow-up. In addition, a pairwise comparison was performed in each patient to determine the change in echocardiographic parameters between baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: Mean implanted valve size was similar (Magna 24.3 ±2.0 mm vs. Epic 24.1 ±2.2 mm). Pre- and intraoperative patient variables were similar between the two groups. There were lower peak and mean pressure gradients in the Magna group, both at discharge and one year after surgery. This correlated with a larger indexed effective orifice area (Magna 0.8 ±0.2 cm(2)/m(2) vs. Epic 0.67 ±0.2 cm(2)/m(2), p = 0.02). In spite of these findings, left ventricular mass regression was not different. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that in a series with relatively low indexed effective orifice areas, the peak and mean gradients obtained were acceptable. More clinical follow-up of these patients is required to assess the true impact of prosthesis patient mismatch.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3701989
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Termedia Publishing House
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37019892013-07-11 One-year hemodynamic comparison of Perimount Magna with St Jude Epic aortic bioprostheses Bobiarski, Jerzy Newcomb, Andrew E. Elhenawy, Abdelsalam M. Maganti, Manjula Bos, Joanne Hemeon, Suzanne Rao, Vivek Arch Med Sci Clinical Research INTRODUCTION: Cardiac surgeons are using more bioprosthetic valves due to the ageing population as well as to improvements that have been made to these implants. We sought to compare the 1-year hemodynamics of two commercially available valves by echocardiographic parameters. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective review of our institutional database revealed 69 patients who received either Perimount Magna (n = 33) or St Jude Epic (n = 36) valves in the aortic position with no other valve surgery between June 2004 and March 2006. All patients received transthoracic echocardiography at 1 year. Comparisons between groups were made at baseline and at 1-year follow-up. In addition, a pairwise comparison was performed in each patient to determine the change in echocardiographic parameters between baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: Mean implanted valve size was similar (Magna 24.3 ±2.0 mm vs. Epic 24.1 ±2.2 mm). Pre- and intraoperative patient variables were similar between the two groups. There were lower peak and mean pressure gradients in the Magna group, both at discharge and one year after surgery. This correlated with a larger indexed effective orifice area (Magna 0.8 ±0.2 cm(2)/m(2) vs. Epic 0.67 ±0.2 cm(2)/m(2), p = 0.02). In spite of these findings, left ventricular mass regression was not different. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that in a series with relatively low indexed effective orifice areas, the peak and mean gradients obtained were acceptable. More clinical follow-up of these patients is required to assess the true impact of prosthesis patient mismatch. Termedia Publishing House 2013-06-21 2013-06-20 /pmc/articles/PMC3701989/ /pubmed/23847665 http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/aoms.2013.35479 Text en Copyright © 2013 Termedia & Banach http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Research
Bobiarski, Jerzy
Newcomb, Andrew E.
Elhenawy, Abdelsalam M.
Maganti, Manjula
Bos, Joanne
Hemeon, Suzanne
Rao, Vivek
One-year hemodynamic comparison of Perimount Magna with St Jude Epic aortic bioprostheses
title One-year hemodynamic comparison of Perimount Magna with St Jude Epic aortic bioprostheses
title_full One-year hemodynamic comparison of Perimount Magna with St Jude Epic aortic bioprostheses
title_fullStr One-year hemodynamic comparison of Perimount Magna with St Jude Epic aortic bioprostheses
title_full_unstemmed One-year hemodynamic comparison of Perimount Magna with St Jude Epic aortic bioprostheses
title_short One-year hemodynamic comparison of Perimount Magna with St Jude Epic aortic bioprostheses
title_sort one-year hemodynamic comparison of perimount magna with st jude epic aortic bioprostheses
topic Clinical Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3701989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23847665
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/aoms.2013.35479
work_keys_str_mv AT bobiarskijerzy oneyearhemodynamiccomparisonofperimountmagnawithstjudeepicaorticbioprostheses
AT newcombandrewe oneyearhemodynamiccomparisonofperimountmagnawithstjudeepicaorticbioprostheses
AT elhenawyabdelsalamm oneyearhemodynamiccomparisonofperimountmagnawithstjudeepicaorticbioprostheses
AT magantimanjula oneyearhemodynamiccomparisonofperimountmagnawithstjudeepicaorticbioprostheses
AT bosjoanne oneyearhemodynamiccomparisonofperimountmagnawithstjudeepicaorticbioprostheses
AT hemeonsuzanne oneyearhemodynamiccomparisonofperimountmagnawithstjudeepicaorticbioprostheses
AT raovivek oneyearhemodynamiccomparisonofperimountmagnawithstjudeepicaorticbioprostheses