Added value of cardiac computed tomography for evaluation of mechanical aortic valve: Emphasis on evaluation of pannus with surgical findings as standard reference

Numerous studies have linked prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) after aortic valve replacement (AVR) to adverse outcomes. Its correlation with long-term survival has been described but with contradicting results. This systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies aims to determine the hazard of PPM after AVR. The Medline and EMBase databases were searched for English-language original publications. Two researchers independently screened studies and extracted data. Pooled estimates were obtained by random effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed to detect sources of heterogeneity. The search yielded 348 potentially relevant studies; 34 were included comprising 27 186 patients and 133 141 patient-years. Defined by the universally accredited indexed effective orifice area <0.85 cm(2)/m(2), 44.2% of patients were categorized as having PPM. In 34.2 and 9.8% of patients moderate (0.65-0.85 cm(2)/m(2)) and severe (<0.65 cm(2)/m(2)) PPM was present, respectively. Prosthesis-patient mismatch was associated with a statistically significant increase in all-cause mortality (HR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.18-1.51), but only a trend to an increase in cardiac-related mortality (HR = 1.51, 95% CI: 0.88-2.60) was recognized. Analysis by severity of PPM demonstrated that both moderate and severe PPM increased all-cause mortality (HR = 1.19, 95% CI: 1.07-1.33 and HR = 1.84, 95% CI: 1.38-2.45) and cardiac-related mortality (HR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.02-1.71 and HR = 6.46, 95% CI: 2.79-14.97). Further analyses showed a consistent effect over separate time intervals during follow-up. Prosthesis-patient mismatch is associated with an increase in all-cause and cardiac-related mortality over long-term follow-up. We recommend that current efforts to prevent PPM should receive more emphasis and a widespread acceptance to improve long-term survival after AVR.

This study investigated whether aortic valve replacement (AVR) is associated with improved survival in patients with severe low-flow/low-gradient aortic stenosis (LF/LGAS) without contractile reserve (CR) on dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE). Patients with LF/LGAS without CR have a high mortality rate with conservative therapy. The benefit of AVR in this subset of patients remains controversial. Eighty-one consecutive patients with symptomatic calcified LF/LGAS (valve area or=20% compared with the baseline value. Multivariable analysis and propensity scores were used to compare survival according to whether or not AVR was performed (n = 55). Five-year survival was higher in AVR patients compared with medically managed patients (54 +/- 7% vs. 13 +/- 7%, p = 0.001) despite a high operative mortality of 22% (n = 12). An AVR was independently associated with lower 5-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio from 0.16 to 5.21 varying with time [95% confidence interval: 0.12-3.16 to 0.21-8.50], p = 0.00026). In 42 propensity-matched patients, 5-year survival was markedly improved by AVR (65 +/- 11% vs. 11 +/- 7%, p = 0.019). Associated bypass surgery (p = 0.007) and MPG

The aim of this prospective study was to investigate the agreement in findings between ECG-gated CT and transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) in patients with aortic prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE).