Sakamoto Yoshimasa, Hashimoto Kazuhiro
Department of Cardiac Surgery, The Jikei University, 3-25-8 Nishishinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-8461, Japan,
Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013 Dec;61(12):669-75. doi: 10.1007/s11748-013-0243-3. Epub 2013 Apr 13.
The influence of aortic valve prosthesis-patient mismatch (VP-PM) on the clinical outcome has been an ongoing controversy. The reported prevalence of VP-PM after aortic valve replacement (AVR) ranges widely between 20 and 70 %. The inconsistent impact of VP-PM on short-term and long-term mortality, regression of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy, and exercise capacity may be explained by differences of the patient populations, the definition of VP-PM, and the use of different prostheses. Moreover, many factors other than the severity of VP-PM should be taken into account when considering its impact on individual patients after AVR. Although the concept of VP-PM is easy to understand, it cannot be applied to the whole patient population. In Japan, the age of the candidates for AVR has increased markedly in recent years, but almost all elderly patients with a small BSA (<1.6 m(2)) have received newer-generation prostheses with a small outer diameter and large effective orifice area. Indeed, previous studies of Japanese patients have demonstrated that VP-PM was no more than moderate in most cases and its impact on clinical outcomes was generally acceptable. Although severe VP-PM is infrequent and its clinical implications are still unproven in elderly Japanese patients, it would seem reasonable to try to prevent severe VP-PM. Thus, VP-PM itself cannot be accepted as an independent risk factor in Japanese patients, but the useful preventive strategies for severe VP-PM in inactive very elderly persons remain controversial. The implantation of newer-generation biological or mechanical prostheses with or without aortic annular enlargement should be considered according to the characteristics of the patient and the risk-benefit ratio for carrying out a particular procedure in an individual patient.
主动脉瓣人工瓣膜-患者不匹配(VP-PM)对临床结局的影响一直存在争议。报道的主动脉瓣置换术(AVR)后VP-PM的患病率在20%至70%之间广泛波动。VP-PM对短期和长期死亡率、左心室(LV)肥厚消退以及运动能力的影响不一致,这可能是由于患者群体的差异、VP-PM的定义以及不同人工瓣膜的使用所致。此外,在考虑VP-PM对AVR术后个体患者的影响时,应考虑许多除VP-PM严重程度之外的因素。虽然VP-PM的概念易于理解,但它不能适用于所有患者群体。在日本,近年来AVR候选者的年龄显著增加,但几乎所有体表面积小(<1.6 m²)的老年患者都接受了外径小、有效瓣口面积大的新一代人工瓣膜。事实上,先前对日本患者的研究表明,在大多数情况下VP-PM不超过中度,其对临床结局的影响通常是可以接受的。虽然严重VP-PM在老年日本患者中并不常见,其临床意义仍未得到证实,但试图预防严重VP-PM似乎是合理的。因此,在日本患者中,VP-PM本身不能被视为独立的危险因素,但对于不活动的高龄患者预防严重VP-PM的有效策略仍存在争议。应根据患者的特点以及对个体患者进行特定手术的风险效益比,考虑植入新一代生物或机械人工瓣膜,无论是否进行主动脉瓣环扩大术。