Patient-prosthesis mismatch after mitral valve replacement: Myth or reality?

Pasquale Totaro, Vincenzo Argano

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Objective: Determining the risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch after mitral valve replacement is still controversial. In this study, we aimed to clarify incidence and clinical implications of such a complication. The accuracy of preoperative prediction of patient-prosthesis mismatch using published in vitro hemodynamic parameters was also investigated. Methods: Ninety-two patients who underwent mitral valve replacement and received Carpentier-Edwards stented bioprosthesis (Edwards Lifesciences, LLC, Irvine Calif) were enrolled. Hemodynamic performances were evaluated at discharge, and the incidence of in vivo patient-prosthesis mismatch (indexed effective orifice area ≤1.2 cm2/m2) was evaluated. Correlation between in vivo patient-prosthesis mismatch and predicted patient-prosthesis mismatch, based on previously published in vitro hemodynamic parameters, was also investigated. Results: Five patients died within 30 days of the operation (5.4% mortality). Mean prosthesis size was 29.8 ± 2. Mean postoperative effective orifice area and indexed effective orifice area (2.5 ± 0.8 cm2 and 1.5 ± 0.4 cm2/m2, respectively) compared favorably with those predicted in vitro (2.2 ± 0.7 cm2 and 1.3 ± 0.5 cm2/m2, respectively). In the subgroup of patients receiving prosthesis size of 27 or smaller, the difference reached statistical significance (2.47 ± 0.83 and 1.61 ± 0.7 for postoperative and predicted effective orifice areas, respectively; P <.001). Postoperative patient-prosthesis mismatch was recorded in 8 patients (8.6%), comparing favorably with the predicted patient-prosthesis mismatch (39% for overall population and 80% for patients receiving prosthesis size ≤ 27). No significant correlation between size of prosthesis and early hemodynamic and clinical outcomes was shown. Conclusions: In our study, stented mitral bioprostheses showed satisfactory postoperative hemodynamic performance, even in smaller prosthesis sizes (≤27 mm). Risk of in vivo postoperative patient-prosthesis mismatch seems to be less relevant than preoperative risk prediction based on in vitro data. Further studies are needed to evaluate the potential clinical impact of mitral patient-prosthesis mismatch.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)697-701
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2007

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery


Dive into the research topics of 'Patient-prosthesis mismatch after mitral valve replacement: Myth or reality?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this