Evaluation of bioprosthetic valve performance as a function of geometric orifice area and space efficiency— A reliable alternative to effective orifice area

  • Joe Sauter


Performance comparisons among commercially available bioprosthetic valves are needlessly complicated by unreliable and complex parameters and exaggerated information from manufacturers. In addition to the issues surrounding the comparisons among valves, surgeons who are selecting the best fit for the patient on the operating table are hampered not only by the faulty parameters mentioned above but by selection tables based on these faulty parameters and by the often unachievable boundary between a proper match and an improper mismatch of the valve to the patient.


Aortic Valve Replacement Orifice Area Bioprosthetic Valve Effective Orifice Area Valve Size 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Rahimtoola SH (1978) The problem of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch. Circulation 58:20–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dumesnil JG, Honos GN, Lemieux M, Beauchemin J (1990) Validation and applications of indexed aortic prosthetic valve areas calculated by Doppler echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 16:637–643PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pibarot P, Honos GN, Durand LG, Dumesnil JG (1996) The effect of patient-prosthesis mismatch on aortic bioprosthetic valve hemodynamic performance and patient clinical status. Can J Cardiol 12:379–387PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pibarot P, Dumesnil J, Lemieux M et al (1998) Impact of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Hemodynamic and Symptomatic Status, Morbidity and Mortality after Aortic Valve Replacement with a Bioprosthetic Heart Valve. J Heart Valve Dis 7(2):211–218PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pibarot P, Dumesnil J (2000) Hemodynamic and clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch in the aortic valve position and its prevention. J Am Coll Cardiol 36:1131–1141CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dumesnil J, Pibarot P (2006) Prosthesis-patient mismatch and clinical outcomes: The evidence continues to accumulate. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 131:952–955CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dumesnil J, Pibarot P vs Blackstone E, Gillinov A, Cosgrove D (2004) [Point-Counterpoint] Prosthesis size and prosthesis-patient size are unrelated to prosthesis-patient mismatch. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 127:1852–1854CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Emery R, Emery A, Holter A, Krogh C (2005) Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch: Impact on Patient Survival. 41st Annual Meeting of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons, Tampa, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Izzat M, Kadir I, Reeves B, Wilde P, Bryan A, Angelini G (1999) Patient-prosthesis mismatch is negligible with modern small-size aortic valve prostheses. Ann Thorac Surg 68:1657–1660CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Medalion B, Blackstone E, Lytle B, White J, Arnold J, Cosgrove D (2000) Aortic valve replacement: Is valve size important? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 119:963–974CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Knez I, Rienmuller R, Maier R, Rehak P, Schrottner B, Machler H, Anelli-Monti M, Rigler B (2001) Left ventricular architecture after valve replacement due to critical aortic stenosis: an approach to dis-/qualify the myth of valve prosthesispatient mismatch? European J Cardio-Thorac Surg 19:797–805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hanayama N, Christakis G, Mallidi H, Joyner C, Fremes S, Morgan C, Mitoff P, Goldman B (2002) Patient prosthesis mismatch is rare after aortic valve replacement: Valve size may be irrelevant. Ann Thorac Surg 73:1822–1829CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gillinov A, Blackstone E, Rodriquez L (2003) Prosthesis-patient size: measurement and clinical implications. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 126:313–316CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Blackstone E, Cosgrove D, Jamieson W, Birkmeyer N, Lemmer J, Miller D, Butchart E, Rizzoli G, Yacoub M, Chai A (2003) Prosthesis size and long term survival after aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 126:783–796CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Emery R, Emery A, Holter A, Krogh C (2005) Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch: Impact on Patient Survival. 41st Annual Meeting of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons, Tampa, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gerosa G, Tarzia V, Rizzoli G, Bottio T (2006) Small aortic annulus: The hydrodynamic performances of 5 commercially available tissue valves. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 131:1058–1064CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joe Sauter
    • 1
  1. 1.SORIN GROUP CarboMedics, Inc.ArvadaUSA

Personalised recommendations