Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT:

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.

SUBMITTER: Minardi G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3251522 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

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

Minardi Giovanni G Pulignano Giovanni G Del Sindaco Donatella D Sordi Martina M Pavaci Herribert H Pergolini Amedeo A Zampi Giordano G Moschella Orsini Francesca F Gaudio Carlo C Musumeci Francesco F

Cardiovascular ultrasound 20111124

<h4>Objectives</h4>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.<h4>Methods</h4>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 echocardiograph ...[more]

PMID: 22114985

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesSutureless and rapid-deployment valves were recently introduced into clinical practice. The Edwards INTUITY valve system is a combination of the Edwards Magna pericardial valve and a subvalvular stent-frame to enable rapid deployment. We performed a parallel cohort study for comparison of the two valve types.MethodsAll patients receiving either an Edwards Magna Ease valve or an Edwards INTUITY valve system due to aortic stenosis from May 2010 until July 2014 were included. Patients undergoing bypass surgery, an additional valve procedure, atrial ablation surgery or replacement of the ascending aorta were excluded. Preoperative characteristics, operative specifications, survival, valve-related adverse events and transvalvulvar gradients were compared.ResultsOne hundred sixteen patients underwent rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement [mean age 75 years (SD: 8); 62% female] and 132 patients underwent conventional aortic valve replacement [70 years (SD: 9); 31% female; P < 0.001]. Conventional valve patients were taller and heavier. The mean EuroSCORE II was 3.1% (SD: 2.7) and 4.4% (SD: 6.0) for rapid-deployment and conventional valve patients, respectively (P = 0.085). The mean implanted valve size was higher in the conventional group [23.2 mm (SD: 2.0) vs 22.5 mm (SD: 2.2); P = 0.007], but postoperative transvalvular mean gradients were comparable [15 mmHg (SD: 6) vs 14 mmHg (SD: 5); P = 0.457]. A subgroup analysis of the most common valve sizes (21 and 23 mm; implanted in 63% of patients) revealed significantly reduced mean postoperative transvalvular gradients in the rapid-deployment group [14 mmHg (SD: 4) vs 16 mmHg (SD: 5); P = 0.025]. A significantly higher percentage received minimally invasive procedures in the rapid-deployment group (59 vs 39%; P < 0.001). The 1- and 3-year survival rate was 96 and 90% in the rapid-deployment group and 95 and 89% in the conventional group (P = 0.521), respectively. Valve-related pacemaker implantations were more common in the rapid-deployment group (9 vs 2%; P = 0.014) and postoperative stroke was more common in the conventional group (1.6 vs 0% per patient year; P = 0.044).ConclusionsWe conclude that this rapid-deployment valve probably facilitates minimally invasive surgery. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis showed reduced transvalvular gradients in smaller valve sizes compared with the conventionally implanted valve of the same type. The favourable haemodynamic profile and the potentially different spectrum of valve-related adverse events should be addressed in further clinical trials.

Project description:BackgroundTranscatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an alternative method to treat patients with severe aortic valve disease. Accurate measurement of the aortic valve annulus and selection of the appropriate artificial valve are critical to the success of TAVI. Multilayer spiral computed tomography (MSCT) is recommended as the "gold standard" for assessing the aortic valve annulus before TAVI. However, MSCT scanning may not be possible for patients with iodine allergy, renal failure, or pregnancy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the aortic valve annulus by three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (3D-TEE) and compare the results with MSCT, exploring the feasibility of 3D-TEE to guide the selection of artificial valve implantation in TAVI.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 74 patients who successfully underwent TAVI in our hospital. Before the operation, 3D-TEE and MSCT were used to measure the maximum diameter, minimum diameter, area-derived diameter, and perimeter-derived diameter of the aortic valve annulus, and the results were analyzed for consistency. To predict the valve size based on 3D-TEE and the MSCT area-derived diameter, we compared the differences between the predicted valve size and the actual implanted valve size, and analyzed the differences between 3D-TEE and MSCT for guiding the selection of the prosthetic valve size.ResultsThere was no significant difference between 3D-TEE and MSCT in the measurement of the maximum diameter, minimum diameter, area, and perimeter of the aortic annulus and their derived diameter (P>0.05). The intraclass correlation coefficients for the maximum diameter, minimum diameter, area-derived diameter, and perimeter-derived diameter of the aortic annulus were 0.89, 0.83, 0.84, and 0.92, respectively. There was no statistical difference in the accuracy of both methods, 3D-TEE and MSCT, in predicting different prosthetic valve sizes for TAVI (P>0.05).Conclusions3D-TEE and MSCT have good agreement for measuring the values of various parameters of the aortic annulus. The accuracy of both methods was similar for predicting the aortic prosthetic valve size. 3D-TEE may provide guidance for selecting the prosthetic valve size for TAVI.

Dataset Information

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

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets