Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch Impact On Patient Quality Of Life After Conventional Aortic Valve Replacement

2019 ◽  
Vol 287 ◽  
pp. e154
Author(s):  
P. Stradins ◽  
K. Meidrops ◽  
E. Prozorovskis
2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (sup1) ◽  
pp. 140-140
Author(s):  
Peteris Stradins ◽  
Kristians Meidrops ◽  
Martins Kalejs ◽  
Eva Strike ◽  
Edgars Prozorovskis Pauls Stradins

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Sportelli ◽  
Tommaso Regesta ◽  
Antonio Salsano ◽  
Paola Ghione ◽  
Carlotta Brega ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (02) ◽  
pp. 124-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grischa Hoffmann ◽  
Selam Abraham-Westphal ◽  
Tim Attmann ◽  
Derk Frank ◽  
Georg Lutter ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) after aortic valve replacement (AVR) on long-term survival and quality of life (QoL) remains controversial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of PPM on long-term survival and QoL in a large cohort of patients treated with isolated stented biological AVR in a single-center experience. Methods We analyzed data of 632 consecutive patients following isolated stented biological AVR between 2007 and 2012 at our institution. We evaluated the QoL (393 evaluable patients) using the Short Form 12-item Health Survey (SF-12) questionnaire via telephone call and the impact of PPM on long-term survival (533 evaluable patients) by Kaplan–Meier's estimate. Results Severe PPM (<0.65 cm2/m2) had a negative impact on physical component summary (PCS) score (SF-12) compared with patients with moderate or no PPM (p = 0.014), while the mental component summary (MCS) score (SF-12) was not affected by the degree of PPM (p = 0.133). Long-term survival was not different among the three different PPM groups investigated (p = 0.75). Conclusion Severity of PPM demonstrated no influence on long-term survival and MCS score (SF-12), but it was associated with a lower PCS score (SF-12) in patients with severe PPM.


Circulation ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 102 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thoralf M. Sundt ◽  
Marci S. Bailey ◽  
Marc R. Moon ◽  
Eric N. Mendeloff ◽  
Charles B. Huddleston ◽  
...  

Background —The optimal management of aortic valve disease in patients >80 years old depends on functional outcome as well as operative risks and late survival. Methods and Results —We retrospectively identified 133 patients (62 men, 71 women) aged 80 to 91 years (mean 84±3 years) who underwent aortic valve replacement alone or in combination with another procedure between January 1, 1993, and April 31, 1998. Demographics included hypertension 68%, diabetes mellitus 17%, and history of stroke 11%. Operative (30 day) mortality rate was 11%. Urgent or emergent surgery, aortic insufficiency, and perioperative stroke or renal dysfunction were risk factors for operative death by multivariable analysis. Intensive care unit and total hospital length of stay were prolonged at 6.2 and 14.7 days, respectively. Late follow-up between July 1, 1998, and November 1, 1999, was 98% complete. Actuarial survival at 1 and 5 years was 80% and 55%, respectively. Predictors of late mortality were preoperative or perioperative stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, aortic stenosis, and postoperative renal dysfunction. The mean New York Heart Association functional class for 65 long-term survivors improved from 3.1 to 1.7. Quality of life assessed with the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 was comparable to that predicted for the general population >75 years old. Conclusions —Functional outcome after aortic valve replacement in patients >80 years old is excellent, the operative risk is acceptable, and the late survival rate is good. Surgery should not be withheld from the elderly on the basis of age alone.


Author(s):  
Andrea Perrotti ◽  
Alessandra Francica ◽  
Francesco Monaco ◽  
Edward Quintana ◽  
Sandro Sponga ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document