Prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: prevalence and medium term prognostic impact

  • María del Carmen León del PinoEmail author
  • Martín Ruíz Ortiz
  • Mónica Delgado Ortega
  • José Sánchez Fernández
  • Carlos Ferreiro Quero
  • Enrique Durán Jiménez
  • Miguel Romero Moreno
  • José Segura Saint-Gerons
  • Soledad Ojeda Pineda
  • Manuel Pan Álvarez-Ossorio
  • Dolores Mesa Rubio
Original Paper


Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) occurs when the effective orifice area of the prosthesis is too small in relation to the patient's body surface area. There are few data available on the frequency and prognostic impact of PPM after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Our aim was to determine the prevalence of PPM and to investigate its association with medium-term clinical course of patients undergoing TAVI. We included 185 patients undergoing TAVI (79 ± 5 years, 49% male, 98% CoreValve) between April-2008 and December-2014. The effective orifice area (EOA) was determined by transthoracic echocardiography prior and after the procedure. We defined PPM as indexed EOA ≤ 0.85 cm2/m2 (severe PPM if ≤ 0.65 cm2/m2). All cause death, stroke and hospitalization for heart failure were considered as major clinical events. 45 patients (24%) showed PPM (severe 11 patients, 6%). PPM was associated with a higher EuroSCORE (OR 1.06, IC 95% 1.01–1.12, p = 0.03), body surface area ≥ 1.72 m2 (OR 3.58, IC 95% 1.30–9.87, p = 0.01) and small aortic annulus (OR 0.73, IC 95% 0.55–0.92, p = 0.03); and severe PPM with small prostheses size (OR 17.79, IC 95% 1.87–169.78, p = 0.012). The mean event-free survival was 34 ± 26 months. Patients with severe PPM showed lower rates of event free survival than the rest of the series (52% vs. 84%, p = 0.04) at 34 months follow up. In our series, PPM was present in a quarter of the patients after TAVI. Higher EuroSCORE, smaller prosthesis size, larger body surface area and smaller aortic annulus diameter were associated with PPM. Severe PPM was an independent factor associated with major events at medium-term follow up.


Prosthesis-patient mismatch Echocardiogram Transcatheter aortic valve implantation CoreValve 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors whose names are listed in the first page report no affiliation nor involvement in an organization or entity with a financial or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.


  1. 1.
    Grube E, Schuler G, Buellesfeld L, Gerckens U, Linke A, Zickmann B et al (2007) Percutaneous aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis in high-risk patients using the second- and current third-generation self-expanding Core-Valve Prosthesis. J Am Coll Cardiol 50:69–76CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tamburino C, Capodanno D, Ramondo A, Petronio AS, Ettori F, Santoro G et al (2011) Incidence and predictors of early and late mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in 663 patients. Circulation 123:299–308CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M, Miller DC, Moses JW, Svensson LG et al (2010) Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med 363:1597–1607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Smith C, Leon M, Mack M, Miller D, Moses J, Svensson L et al (2011) Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 364(23):2187–2198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kodali S, Williams M, Smith S, Lars G, Webb JG, Makkar RR et al (2012) Two-year outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement. N Engl J Med 366:1686–1695CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hahn R, Pibarot P, Stewart W, Weissman NJ, Gopalakrishnan D, Keane MG et al (2013) Comparison of transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement in severe aortic stenosis a longitudinal study of echocardiography parameters in Cohort A of the PARTNER trial (placement of aortic transcatheter valves). JACC 61(25):2514–21CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Holmes DR, Mack MJ, Kaul S, Agnihotri A, Alexander KP, Bailey SR et al (2012) 2012 ACCF / AATS / SCAI / STS expert consensus document on transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Cathet Cardiovasc Interv 79:1023–1082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Avanzas P, Pascual I, Muñoz-García AJ, Segura J, Alonso-briales JH, Suárez de Lezo J et al (2017) Seguimiento a largo plazo de pacientes con estenosis aórtica grave tratados con prótesis autoexpandible. Rev Esp Cardiol 70(4):247–253CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lancellotti P, Pibarot P, Chambers J et al (2016) Recommendations for the imaging assessment of prosthetic heart valves: a report from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging endorsed by the Chinese Society of Echocardiography, the Inter-American Society of Echocardiography, and the Brazilian Department of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 17:589–590CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Genereux P, Piazza N, Van Mieghem NM, Blackstone EH et al (2012) Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 42:S45–S60CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dumesnil J, Pibarot P (2011) Prosthesis-patient mismatch: an update. Curr Cardiol Rep 13(3):250–257CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Takagi H, Yamamoto H, Iwata K, Goto SN, Umemoto T (2012) A meta-analysis of effects of prosthesis-patient mismatch after aortic valve replacement on late mortality. Int J Cardiol 159(2):150–154CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen J, Lin Y, Kang B, Wang Z (2014) Indexed effective orifice area is a significant predictor of higher mid- and long-term mortality rates following aortic valve replacement in patients with prosthesis-patient mismatch. Eur J Cardio-thoracic Surg 45(2):234–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Takagi H, Umemoto T (2016) Prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Ann Thorac Surg 101(3):872–880CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pibarot P, Weissman NJ, Stewart WJ, Hahn RT, Lindman BR, McAndrew T et al (2014) Incidence and sequelae of prosthesis-patient mismatch in transcatheter versus surgical valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: a PARTNER trial cohort-a analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 64(13):1323–1334CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Muñoz-García AJ, Muñoz-García M, Carrasco-Chinchilla F, Molina-Mora MJ, Rodríguez-Bailón I, Domínguez-Franco AJ et al (2013) Incidence and clinical outcome of prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the CoreValve prosthesis. Int J Cardiol 167(3):1074–1076CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zorn GL, Little SH, Tadros P, Deeb GM, Gleason TG, Heiser J et al (2016) Prosthesis-patient mismatch in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: a randomized trial of a self-expanding prosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 151(4):1014–1023CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    da Silva C, Sahlen A, Winter R, Bäck M, Rück A, Settergren M et al (2014) Prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: impact of 2D-transthoracic echocardiography versus 3D-transesophageal echocardiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 30:1549–1557CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zoghbi WA, Chambers JB, Dumesnil JG, Foster E, Gottdiener JS, Grayburn PA et al (2009) Recommendations for evaluation of prosthetic valves with echocardiography and doppler ultrasound. A report from the American Society of Echocardiography’s guidelines and standards committee and the task force on prosthetic valves, developed in conjunction. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 22(9):975–1014CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Quiñones M, Douglas P, Foster E, Gorcsan J, Lewis J, Pearlman A et al (2003) ACC/AHA clinical competence statement on echocardiography: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/American College of Physicians–American Society of Internal Medicine. Task force on clinical competence. JACC 41:687–708CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Evangelista A, María Á, Gómez A, Durán RM, Yagüela MM, María J et al (2000) Guías de práctica clínica de la Sociedad Española de Cardiología en ecocardiografía. Rev Esp Cardiol 53(5):663–683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lang RM, Bierig M, Devereux RB, Flachskampf FA, Foster E, Pellikka PA et al (2006) Recommendations for chamber quantification. Eur J Echocardiogr 7(2):79–108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dubois D, Dubois E (1916) A formula to estimate the approximate surface area of height and weight be known. Arch Intern Med 17:863–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mesa D, Suárez de Lezo J, Alvarez-Ossorio M, Ruiz Ortiz M, Delgado Ortega M, León del Pino M et al (2011) Measurement of aortic valve annulus using different cardiac imaging techniques in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: agreement with finally implanted prosthesis size. Echocardiography 28:388–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    León C, Suárez de Lezo J, Mesa D, Pan M, Ruiz M, Delgado M et al (2011) Early development of leaks in the CoreValve percutaneous aortic valve prosthesis: echocardiographic assessment. Rev Esp Cardiol 64:67–70CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cejudo Díaz del Campo L, Mesa Rubio D, Ruiz Ortiz M, Delgado Ortega M, Pan M, Ojeda Pineda S et al (2012) Usefulness of transesophageal echocardiography during implantation of the CoreValve percutaneous aortic prosthesis: Influence of the learning curve. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 80:964–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Avanzas P, Munoz-Garcia A, Segura J, Pan M, Alonso-Briales J, Lozano I et al (2010) Percutaneous Implantation of the CoreValve(registered trademark) self-expanding aortic valve prosthesis in patients with severe aortic stenosis: early experience in Spain. Rev Esp Cardiol 63(2):141–148CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rodés-cabau J, Pibarot P, Suri RM, Kodali S, Thourani VH, Szeto WY et al (2014) Impact of aortic annulus size on valve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes after transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement insights from the PARTNER trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 7:701–711CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pibarot P, Clavel M, Dahou A (2015) Patient and procedure selection for the prevention of prosthesis-patient mismatch following aortic valve replacement. EuroIntervention 11:106–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lebera A, Eichingerc W, Rieberb J, Lieberc M, Schlegerc S, Ebersbergerb U et al (2013) MSCT guided sizing of the Edwards Sapien XT TAVI device: Impact of different degrees of oversizing on clinical outcome. Int J Cardiol 168(3):2658–2664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Samim M, Stella PR, Agostoni P, Kluin J, Ramjankhan F, Sieswerda G et al (2013) A prospective “oversizing” strategy of the Edwards SAPIEN bioprosthesis: results and impact on aortic regurgitation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 145(2):398–405CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dayan V, Soca G, Stanham R, Lorenzo A, Ferreiro A (2015) Is patient–prosthesis mismatch a predictor of survival or a surrogate marker of co-morbidities in cardiac surgery? Int J Cardiol 190:389–392CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tzikas A, Piazza N, Geleijnse ML, Van Mieghem N, Nuis RJ, Schultz C et al (2010) Prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the medtronic corevalve system in patients with aortic stenosis. Am J Cardiol 106(2):255–260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nishimura R, Otto C, Bonow R, Mack M, Carabello B, McLeod C et al (2017) 2017 AHA/ACC focused update of the 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on clinical practice guidelines. Circulation 135(21):1–123Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • María del Carmen León del Pino
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Martín Ruíz Ortiz
    • 1
  • Mónica Delgado Ortega
    • 1
  • José Sánchez Fernández
    • 1
  • Carlos Ferreiro Quero
    • 1
  • Enrique Durán Jiménez
    • 1
  • Miguel Romero Moreno
    • 1
  • José Segura Saint-Gerons
    • 1
  • Soledad Ojeda Pineda
    • 1
  • Manuel Pan Álvarez-Ossorio
    • 1
  • Dolores Mesa Rubio
    • 1
  1. 1.Servicio de CardiologíaHospital Universitario Reina SofíaCórdobaSpain
  2. 2.MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations