The impact of patient‐prosthesis mismatch on early and long‐term survival after aortic replacement with the Edwards Perimount valve: A propensity score‐matched analysis
Abstract
Background
To investigate the impact of severe patient‐prosthesis mismatch (PPM) related to the Edwards Lifesciences Perimount (EP) bioprosthesis in the aortic position on early in‐hospital outcomes and long‐term survival.
Methods
A total of 5964 consecutive patients underwent aortic valve replacement at the Bristol Heart Institute between 1998 and 2014, 2667 representing the cohort of this study received EP. PPM was defined severe as EOAi < 0.65 cm2/m2. To minimize bias, propensity score matching was conducted and two groups A and B (without and with severe PPM) of 320 patients with similar preoperative characteristics were matched. We assessed early in‐hospital outcomes including CVA, re‐exploration for bleeding, low cardiac output, wound infection, acute renal injury, length of hospital stay, and long‐term survival for both groups in unmatched and matched populations.
Results
In the unmatched analysis, 18.3% of patients had severe PPM. Severe PPM was not associated with increased in‐hospital mortality (4.5% vs. 2.9%, respectively, p = .09) or any other early adverse outcomes except increased length of hospital stay (10.57 ± 8.2 vs. 11.7 ± 9.4, respectively, p = .01). Long‐term survival differed significantly between groups at 2 and 8 years (91.8% vs. 91.4% and 60.5% vs. 55.7%, respectively, p = .02). Matched analysis showed no differences between the groups in early health outcomes and overall survival at 2 and 8 years was also similar (89.7% vs. 91% and 57.3% vs. 58%, group A vs. B, respectively p = .9).
Conclusion
Presence of PPM does not seem to affect early in‐hospital outcomes or late survival when using EP in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement.