RT Journal Article
T1 Impact of Pre-Existing Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Survival Following Aortic Valve-in-Valve Procedures.
A1 Pibarot, Philippe
A1 Simonato, Matheus
A1 Barbanti, Marco
A1 Linke, Axel
A1 Kornowski, Ran
A1 Rudolph, Tanja
A1 Spence, Mark
A1 Moat, Neil
A1 Aldea, Gabriel
A1 Mennuni, Marco
A1 Iadanza, Alessandro
A1 Amrane, Hafid
A1 Gaia, Diego
A1 Kim, Won-Keun
A1 Napodano, Massimo
A1 Baumbach, Hardy
A1 Finkelstein, Ariel
A1 Kobayashi, Junjiro
A1 Brecker, Stephen
A1 Don, Creighton
A1 Cerillo, Alfredo
A1 Unbehaun, Axel
A1 Attias, David
A1 Nejjari, Mohammed
A1 Jones, Noah
A1 Fiorina, Claudia
A1 Tchetche, Didier
A1 Philippart, Raphael
A1 Spargias, Konstantinos
A1 Hernandez, Jose-Maria
A1 Latib, Azeem
A1 Dvir, Danny
K1 prosthesis-patient-mismatch
K1 transcatheter aortic valve replacement
K1 valve-in-valve
AB The aim of this study was to determine whether the association of small label size of the surgical valve with increased mortality after transcatheter valve-in-valve (ViV) implantation is, at least in part, related to pre-existing prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) (i.e., a bioprosthesis that is too small in relation to body size). Transcatheter ViV implantation is an alternative for the treatment of patients with degenerated bioprostheses. Small label size of the surgical valve has been associated with increased mortality after ViV implantation. Data from 1,168 patients included in the VIVID (Valve-in-Valve International Data) registry were analyzed. Pre-existing PPM of the surgical valve was determined using a reference value of effective orifice area for each given model and size of implanted prosthetic valve indexed for body surface area. Severe PPM was defined according to the criteria proposed by the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2: indexed effective orifice area  Among the 1,168 patients included in the registry, 89 (7.6%) had pre-existing severe PPM. Patients with severe PPM had higher 30-day (10.3%, p = 0.01) and 1-year (unadjusted: 28.6%, p  Pre-existing PPM of the failed surgical valve is strongly and independently associated with increased risk for mortality following ViV implantation.
YR 2018
FD 2018
LK http://hdl.handle.net/10668/12027
UL http://hdl.handle.net/10668/12027
LA en
DS RISalud
RD Apr 8, 2025