DOI: 10.4244/EIJV7I6A107

Prosthesis-patient mismatch in aortic valve disease: surgical versus transcatheter valve replacement

Philippe Pibarot*, DVM, PhD, FACC, FAHA, FESC

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) occurs when the effective orifice area (EOA) of a normally functioning prosthesis is too small in relation to the patient’s body size, resulting in abnormally high post-operative gradients. Moderate PPM (indexed EOA<0.85 cm2/m2) may be quite frequent (20-70%) following surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), whereas the prevalence of severe PPM (indexed EOA<0.65 cm2/m2) ranges from 2% to 20%1. PPM, and especially severe PPM, is associated with increased risk of operative mortality, less improvement in symptoms, less regression of LV hypertrophy, more adverse cardiac events, and reduced long-term survival1.

However, the impact of PPM is not equivalent in all patients, thereby underlining the importance of individualised preventive strategies. PPM is indeed relatively well tolerated in elderly, sedentary patients with preserved LV function, whereas it has a highly detrimental impact in patients with depressed LV systolic function, severe LV hypertrophy, and/or concomitant mitral regurgitation1. The surgeon is thus confronted with a dilemma because, on the one hand, avoidance of PPM is crucial in these higher risk patients but, on the other hand, the alternative procedures that can be used to prevent PPM may increase the complexity and duration of SAVR. And, this may, in turn, translate into increased operative risk in a population that is already highly vulnerable.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a valid alternative to SAVR. The incidence of moderate PPM reported in series of patients who received balloon- or self-expandable transcatheter valves was between 18 and 32% and that of severe PPM was between 2 and 9%2-7. Furthermore, PPM was associated with less regression of LV mass, volumes, and diastolic dysfunction as well as less functional improvement following TAVR7. It is also important to emphasise that the patient’s aortic annulus size in these TAVR series was, on average, much smaller compared to contemporary SAVR series. Accordingly, in a previous study where TAVR and SAVR cohorts were matched for aortic annulus size, the incidence of severe PPM was markedly lower with TAVR (6%) compared to SAVR (28% with stented bioprostheses and 20% with stentless bioprostheses). The superiority of TAVR over SAVR for the prevention of PPM was particularly obvious in the subset of patients with a small aortic annulus2,6. The lower incidence of severe PPM and ensuing lower residual gradients is most likely one of the predominant factors contributing to the faster and better recovery of LV ejection fraction following TAVR compared to SAVR in patients with severe AS and depressed LV systolic function3. Hence, TAVR may offer an attractive alternative to SAVR for the prevention of PPM because it ensures optimal valve haemodynamics with complete relief of LV outflow obstruction while minimising the operative risk.

Conflict of interest statement

The author has no conflict to declare.

References


References

Volume 7 Number 6
Oct 28, 2011
Volume 7 Number 6
View full issue


Key metrics

On the same subject

Editorial

10.4244/EIJ-E-23-00052 Mar 18, 2024
Comparative preclinical assessment of drug-coated balloons: a blessing and a curse for clinical translation
Joner M and Wild L
free

Debate

10.4244/EIJ-E-24-00005 Mar 18, 2024
Ischaemic and viability testing for guiding PCI are overrated: pros and cons
McEntegart M et al
free

Original Research

10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00725 Mar 18, 2024
A systematic algorithm for large-bore arterial access closure after TAVI: the TAVI-MultiCLOSE study
Rosseel L et al

Original Research

10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00783 Mar 18, 2024
Redo-TAVI with the ACURATE neo2 and Prime XL for balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve failure
Meier D et al
Trending articles
281.88

State-of-the-Art Review

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00695 Nov 19, 2021
Transcatheter treatment for tricuspid valve disease
Praz F et al
free
243.2

State of the art

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-01117 Sep 20, 2022
Recanalisation of coronary chronic total occlusions
Di Mario C et al
free
208.35

State-of-the-Art Review

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-01034 Jun 3, 2022
Management of in-stent restenosis
Alfonso F et al
free
168.7

Translational research

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00824 May 15, 2022
Bench test and in vivo evaluation of longitudinal stent deformation during proximal optimisation
Toth GG et al
free
167.05

Expert review

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00690 May 15, 2022
Crush techniques for percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions
Moroni F et al
free
151.03

State-of-the-Art

10.4244/EIJ-D-22-00776 Apr 3, 2023
Computed tomographic angiography in coronary artery disease
Serruys PW et al
free
118

Translational research

10.4244/EIJ-D-22-00718 Jun 5, 2023
Preclinical evaluation of the degradation kinetics of third-generation resorbable magnesium scaffolds
Seguchi M et al
110.35

Viewpoint

10.4244/EIJ-E-22-00007 May 15, 2022
TAVI at 20: how a crazy idea led to a clinical revolution
Eltchaninoff H et al
free
X

The Official Journal of EuroPCR and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI)

EuroPCR EAPCI
PCR ESC
Impact factor: 6.2
2022 Journal Citation Reports®
Science Edition (Clarivate Analytics, 2023)
Online ISSN 1969-6213 - Print ISSN 1774-024X
© 2005-2024 Europa Group - All rights reserved