Overcoming prosthesis-patient mismatch with transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Annals of cardiothoracic surgery Pub Date : 2024-05-31 Epub Date: 2024-05-15 DOI:10.21037/acs-2024-aae-27
Kendra J Grubb, Stephanie K Tom, Ibrahim Sultan, Michel Pompeu Sá
{"title":"Overcoming prosthesis-patient mismatch with transcatheter aortic valve replacement.","authors":"Kendra J Grubb, Stephanie K Tom, Ibrahim Sultan, Michel Pompeu Sá","doi":"10.21037/acs-2024-aae-27","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For decades, surgeons have recognized the risk of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) when treating aortic stenosis (AS) with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The concept of PPM-or placing a valve that is too small for the cardiac output requirements of the patient-has been associated with worse patient outcomes, including increased risk of death. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the standard treatment for most patients with severe symptomatic AS and is associated with improved hemodynamics and lower risks of PPM. Larger surgical valves, stentless, and sutureless technology, and surgical aortic annulus enlargement (AAE) have been employed to avoid severe PPM. However, especially in the small aortic annulus (SAA), TAVR may provide a benefit. Understanding who is at risk for PPM requires preplanning, and cardiac-gated computed tomography (CT) imaging is the standard of care when considering TAVR. It should be standard for all patients with AS. Once SAA is identified, the risk of PPM can be calculated, and an informed decision made on whether to proceed with SAVR or TAVR. In the current TAVR era, younger patients are treated with TAVR driven by patient preference, but with little long-term data to support the practice. Selecting the best valve for the patient is a multifactorial decision often nuanced by anatomical considerations, hemodynamic and durability expectations, and decisions regarding lifetime management that may include placing a second valve. Although PPM may be only one of the factors to consider, the association with elevated mean gradients and worse outcomes certainly makes TAVR a good solution for many patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":8067,"journal":{"name":"Annals of cardiothoracic surgery","volume":"13 3","pages":"236-243"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11148752/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of cardiothoracic surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/acs-2024-aae-27","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For decades, surgeons have recognized the risk of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) when treating aortic stenosis (AS) with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The concept of PPM-or placing a valve that is too small for the cardiac output requirements of the patient-has been associated with worse patient outcomes, including increased risk of death. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the standard treatment for most patients with severe symptomatic AS and is associated with improved hemodynamics and lower risks of PPM. Larger surgical valves, stentless, and sutureless technology, and surgical aortic annulus enlargement (AAE) have been employed to avoid severe PPM. However, especially in the small aortic annulus (SAA), TAVR may provide a benefit. Understanding who is at risk for PPM requires preplanning, and cardiac-gated computed tomography (CT) imaging is the standard of care when considering TAVR. It should be standard for all patients with AS. Once SAA is identified, the risk of PPM can be calculated, and an informed decision made on whether to proceed with SAVR or TAVR. In the current TAVR era, younger patients are treated with TAVR driven by patient preference, but with little long-term data to support the practice. Selecting the best valve for the patient is a multifactorial decision often nuanced by anatomical considerations, hemodynamic and durability expectations, and decisions regarding lifetime management that may include placing a second valve. Although PPM may be only one of the factors to consider, the association with elevated mean gradients and worse outcomes certainly makes TAVR a good solution for many patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过经导管主动脉瓣置换术克服假体与患者不匹配的问题。
几十年来,外科医生已经认识到在用主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)治疗主动脉瓣狭窄(AS)时存在假体与患者不匹配(PPM)的风险。PPM的概念--即植入的瓣膜太小,无法满足患者的心输出量要求--与患者预后恶化有关,包括增加死亡风险。经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)已成为大多数严重无症状AS患者的标准治疗方法,可改善血液动力学并降低PPM风险。为了避免严重的 PPM,人们采用了更大的手术瓣膜、无支架和无缝合技术以及主动脉瓣环扩大手术(AAE)。然而,特别是在小主动脉瓣环(SAA),TAVR 可能会带来益处。了解哪些人有 PPM 风险需要预先计划,而心脏门控计算机断层扫描(CT)成像是考虑进行 TAVR 时的护理标准。它应该成为所有 AS 患者的标准。一旦确定了 SAA,就可以计算出 PPM 的风险,并在知情的情况下决定是进行 SAVR 还是 TAVR。在当前的 TAVR 时代,年轻患者接受 TAVR 治疗是出于患者的偏好,但几乎没有长期数据支持这种做法。为患者选择最佳瓣膜是一个多因素的决定,通常会受到解剖学因素、血流动力学和耐久性预期以及终生管理决定(可能包括放置第二个瓣膜)的影响。虽然 PPM 可能只是考虑因素之一,但与平均梯度升高和更差的预后有关,这无疑使 TAVR 成为许多患者的良好解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
Donation after circulatory death transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes and methods of donation. A critical evaluation of donor heart offer acceptance in the United Kingdom. Cardiac transplantation in controlled donation after circulatory death: a meta-analysis of long-term survival using reconstructed time-to-event data. Ethical considerations in controlled donation after circulatory death. Heart transplantation in controlled donation after circulatory determination of death: the Italian experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1