Prevalence and Avoidance of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch in Aortic Valve Replacement in Small Adults

Background It is still controversial as to whether a small prosthesis should be inserted or a small aortic annulus should be enlarged to minimize patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM). This retrospective study reviewed our strategy for avoiding PPM. Methods Isolated or combined aortic valve replacement was performed in 181 patients, including 24 patients (13.3%) aged less than 65 years with a small aortic annulus (≤ 21 mm) who underwent enlargement of the annulus by the Manouguian (n = 18) or Nicks (n = 6) procedure. In patients aged 65 years or more, a Carpentier-Edwards Perimount pericardial (CEP) valve was implanted with few exceptions. We assessed our strategy for avoiding PPM by comparison with published normal reference values for the indexed effective orifice area. Results A CEP valve was implanted in 53 patients, and St. Jude Medical (SJM) mechanical valves were used in 128 patients. A standard 21-mm SJM valve was only used in 4 patients and no 19-mm valves were employed. However, 19-mm CEP valves were used in 12 older patients with a small body surface area (1.43 ± 0.14 m2). No patient receiving an SJM valve had an indexed effective orifice area of 0.85 cm2/m2 or less, and PPM developed in only 2 (3.8%) of 53 patients receiving CEP valves. Consequently, the prevalence of PPM was 1.1%. The 10-year survival rates of patients receiving CEP or SJM valves with or without annular enlargement were similar. Conclusions The prevalence of PPM was low in patients more than 65 years old with a relatively small body size who received bioprosthetic valves. In patients less than 65 years old with a small annulus, the method of first choice for avoiding PPM is aortic annular enlargement.