Background: Surgical method was introduced for enhancement of prosthetic valve insertion and overcoming difficulties ensourcing from prosthesis-patient mismatch. Methods: Twenty-two patients that underwent aortic valv...Background: Surgical method was introduced for enhancement of prosthetic valve insertion and overcoming difficulties ensourcing from prosthesis-patient mismatch. Methods: Twenty-two patients that underwent aortic valve replacement between January 2005 and July 2009 were included in this prospective study. In these patients, the insertion of prosthesis larger than the annulus diameter was attempted after the application of an external pressure that increased the transverse axis diameter of the aortic annulus. The postoperative results and complications were assessed. Results: This surgical method was performed on 22 patients (16 males, 6 females, mean age: 52.2 ± 15.8 years) during the valve replacement. In 12 patients (55%), replacement of proper sized aortic valve compliant to their surface area was accomplished, while the insertion of a proper valve could not be achieved in 10 (45%) of the patients. No perioperative mortality or complications related to the procedure were reported. Conclusion: Increasing the transverse diameter of aortic valve may not only facilitate the insertion of a prosthetic valve but also aid in overcoming prosthesis-patient mismatch. Further studies on larger series are necessary to document the actual effectively and precise selection criteria for application of this method.展开更多
文摘Background: Surgical method was introduced for enhancement of prosthetic valve insertion and overcoming difficulties ensourcing from prosthesis-patient mismatch. Methods: Twenty-two patients that underwent aortic valve replacement between January 2005 and July 2009 were included in this prospective study. In these patients, the insertion of prosthesis larger than the annulus diameter was attempted after the application of an external pressure that increased the transverse axis diameter of the aortic annulus. The postoperative results and complications were assessed. Results: This surgical method was performed on 22 patients (16 males, 6 females, mean age: 52.2 ± 15.8 years) during the valve replacement. In 12 patients (55%), replacement of proper sized aortic valve compliant to their surface area was accomplished, while the insertion of a proper valve could not be achieved in 10 (45%) of the patients. No perioperative mortality or complications related to the procedure were reported. Conclusion: Increasing the transverse diameter of aortic valve may not only facilitate the insertion of a prosthetic valve but also aid in overcoming prosthesis-patient mismatch. Further studies on larger series are necessary to document the actual effectively and precise selection criteria for application of this method.
