Skip to main content
Top
Published in: General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 9/2020

01-09-2020 | Aortic Valve Replacement | Original Article

Hemodynamic performance and incidence of patient–prosthesis mismatch of small-sized Trifecta pericardial aortic valves

Authors: Susumu Manabe, Ryoji Koinoshita, Daiki Hirayama, Norihisa Yuge, Kazunobu Hirooka

Published in: General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery | Issue 9/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

Small-sized bioprosthetic valves are sometimes associated with suboptimal hemodynamic performance, leading to a patient–prosthesis mismatch. Trifecta pericardial valves are designed to improve hemodynamic performance. The purpose of this study was to investigate the hemodynamic properties of small-sized Trifecta valves and their efficacy in preventing a patient–prosthesis mismatch.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of 108 patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement with a Trifecta valve of 23 mm or less in a single Japanese institution. The hemodynamic performance was evaluated with an echocardiography examination in all patients after surgery, and the development of a patient–prosthesis mismatch was judged with the measured in vivo indexed effective orifice area.

Results

There was one early and seven late mortalities. There were no valve explants due to structural valve deterioration. Postoperative mean pressure gradients of 19-, 21-, and 23-mm valves were 15.1, 11.4, and 9.0 mmHg, respectively. The effective orifice area of 19-, 21-, and 23-mm valves was 1.41, 1.69, and 1.78 cm2, respectively. Patient–prosthesis mismatch occurred in 14 patients (1 severe and 13 moderate) and the incidence was 13.0% (15.4% in 19 mm, 18.0% in 21 mm, and 3.3% in 23 mm).

Conclusions

The small-sized Trifecta valves showed excellent hemodynamic performance and were associated with a low incidence rate of patient–prosthesis mismatch.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Koyama T, Okura H, Kume T, Fukuhara K, Imai K, Hayashida A, et al. Impact of energy loss index on left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement. J Echocardiogr. 2014;12:51–8.CrossRef Koyama T, Okura H, Kume T, Fukuhara K, Imai K, Hayashida A, et al. Impact of energy loss index on left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement. J Echocardiogr. 2014;12:51–8.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Ali A, Patel A, Ali Z, Abu-Omar Y, Saeed A, Athanasiou T, et al. Enhanced left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis is associated with improved long-term survival. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011;142:285–91.CrossRef Ali A, Patel A, Ali Z, Abu-Omar Y, Saeed A, Athanasiou T, et al. Enhanced left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis is associated with improved long-term survival. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011;142:285–91.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Fallon JM, DeSimone JP, Brennan JM, O’Brien S, Thibault DP, DiScipio AW, et al. The incidence and consequence of prosthesis-patient mismatch after surgical aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;106:14–23.CrossRef Fallon JM, DeSimone JP, Brennan JM, O’Brien S, Thibault DP, DiScipio AW, et al. The incidence and consequence of prosthesis-patient mismatch after surgical aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;106:14–23.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Sá MPBDO, de Carvalho MMB, Sobral Filho DC, Cavalcanti LRP, Rayol SDC, Diniz RGS, et al. Surgical aortic valve replacement and patient–prosthesis mismatch: a meta-analysis of 108182 patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;56:44–54.CrossRef Sá MPBDO, de Carvalho MMB, Sobral Filho DC, Cavalcanti LRP, Rayol SDC, Diniz RGS, et al. Surgical aortic valve replacement and patient–prosthesis mismatch: a meta-analysis of 108182 patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;56:44–54.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Freitas-Ferraz AB, Tirado-Conte G, Dagenais F, Ruel M, Al-Atassi T, Dumont E, et al. Aortic stenosis and small aortic annulus. Circulation. 2019;139:2685–702.CrossRef Freitas-Ferraz AB, Tirado-Conte G, Dagenais F, Ruel M, Al-Atassi T, Dumont E, et al. Aortic stenosis and small aortic annulus. Circulation. 2019;139:2685–702.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Yanagawa B, Tam DY, Hong K, Mazine A, Bagai A, Shahbaz NK, et al. Magna ease versus trifecta early hemodynamics: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Innovation. 2018;13:167–272. Yanagawa B, Tam DY, Hong K, Mazine A, Bagai A, Shahbaz NK, et al. Magna ease versus trifecta early hemodynamics: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Innovation. 2018;13:167–272.
7.
go back to reference Colli A, Marchetto G, Salizzoni S, Rinaldi M, Di Marco L, Pacini D, et al. The TRIBECA study: (TRI)fecta (B)ioprosthesis (E)valuation versus (C)arpentier Magna-Ease in (A)ortic position. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016;49:478–85.CrossRef Colli A, Marchetto G, Salizzoni S, Rinaldi M, Di Marco L, Pacini D, et al. The TRIBECA study: (TRI)fecta (B)ioprosthesis (E)valuation versus (C)arpentier Magna-Ease in (A)ortic position. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016;49:478–85.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Braathen B, Husebye T, Lunde I, Tønnessen T. Trifecta has lower gradient and less prosthesis-patient mismatch than mosaic ultra in the aortic position: a prospective randomized study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;158:1032–9.CrossRef Braathen B, Husebye T, Lunde I, Tønnessen T. Trifecta has lower gradient and less prosthesis-patient mismatch than mosaic ultra in the aortic position: a prospective randomized study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;158:1032–9.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Yadlapati A, Diep J, Barnes M, Grogan T, Bethencourt DM, Vorobiof G, et al. Comprehensive hemodynamic comparison and frequency of patient-prosthesis mismatch between the St. Jude Medical Trifecta and Epic bioprosthetic aortic valves. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2014;27:581–9.CrossRef Yadlapati A, Diep J, Barnes M, Grogan T, Bethencourt DM, Vorobiof G, et al. Comprehensive hemodynamic comparison and frequency of patient-prosthesis mismatch between the St. Jude Medical Trifecta and Epic bioprosthetic aortic valves. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2014;27:581–9.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Domoto S, Niinami H, Uwabe K, Koike H, Tabata M, Morita K, et al. Comparison of early haemodynamics of 19-mm aortic valve bioprostheses in patients with a small aortic annulus. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2016;22:19–25.CrossRef Domoto S, Niinami H, Uwabe K, Koike H, Tabata M, Morita K, et al. Comparison of early haemodynamics of 19-mm aortic valve bioprostheses in patients with a small aortic annulus. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2016;22:19–25.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Goldman S, Cheng A, Bavaria JE, Petracek MR, Groh MA, Schaff HV. Midterm, multicenter clinical and hemodynamic results for the Trifecta aortic pericardial valve. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;153:561–9.CrossRef Goldman S, Cheng A, Bavaria JE, Petracek MR, Groh MA, Schaff HV. Midterm, multicenter clinical and hemodynamic results for the Trifecta aortic pericardial valve. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;153:561–9.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Phan K, Phan S, Misfeld M, Eusanio MD, Yan TD. Early hemodynamic performance of the third generation St Jude Trifecta aortic prosthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;149:1567–75.CrossRef Phan K, Phan S, Misfeld M, Eusanio MD, Yan TD. Early hemodynamic performance of the third generation St Jude Trifecta aortic prosthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;149:1567–75.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Capodanno D, Petronio AS, Prendergast B, Eltchaninoff H, Vahanian A, Modine T, et al. Standardized definitions of structural deterioration and valve failure in assessing long-term durability of transcatheter and surgical aortic bioprosthetic valves: a consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) endorsed by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;52:408–17.CrossRef Capodanno D, Petronio AS, Prendergast B, Eltchaninoff H, Vahanian A, Modine T, et al. Standardized definitions of structural deterioration and valve failure in assessing long-term durability of transcatheter and surgical aortic bioprosthetic valves: a consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) endorsed by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;52:408–17.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Okamura H, Yamaguchi A, Yoshizaki T, Nagano H, Itoh S, Morita H, et al. Clinical outcomes and hemodynamics of the 19-mm perimount magna bioprosthesis in an aortic position. Circ J. 2012;76:102–8.CrossRef Okamura H, Yamaguchi A, Yoshizaki T, Nagano H, Itoh S, Morita H, et al. Clinical outcomes and hemodynamics of the 19-mm perimount magna bioprosthesis in an aortic position. Circ J. 2012;76:102–8.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Tadokoro N, Fukushima S, Shimahara Y, Matsumoto Y, Yamashita K, et al. Trifecta vs. Magna for aortic valve replacement. Differences in clinical outcome and valve hemodynamics. Circ J. 2018;82:2767–75.CrossRef Tadokoro N, Fukushima S, Shimahara Y, Matsumoto Y, Yamashita K, et al. Trifecta vs. Magna for aortic valve replacement. Differences in clinical outcome and valve hemodynamics. Circ J. 2018;82:2767–75.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Pinon M, Duran D, Pazos P, Pradas G. Leaflet tear in a Trifecta aortic bioprosthesis 34 months after implantation. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2015;20:281–2.CrossRef Pinon M, Duran D, Pazos P, Pradas G. Leaflet tear in a Trifecta aortic bioprosthesis 34 months after implantation. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2015;20:281–2.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Hemodynamic performance and incidence of patient–prosthesis mismatch of small-sized Trifecta pericardial aortic valves
Authors
Susumu Manabe
Ryoji Koinoshita
Daiki Hirayama
Norihisa Yuge
Kazunobu Hirooka
Publication date
01-09-2020
Publisher
Springer Singapore
Published in
General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery / Issue 9/2020
Print ISSN: 1863-6705
Electronic ISSN: 1863-6713
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11748-019-01284-3

Other articles of this Issue 9/2020

General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 9/2020 Go to the issue