Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

The objective of this study was to determine the effects of sizing policy for pericardial stentless valves on hemodynamic performance and aortic root geometry. Discharge echocardiography was performed on 103 patients out of 110 consecutive implants (54 men and 49 women, mean age 75 ± 9 years, and 36% with Co-CABG). Valve prosthesis size was based on largest annulus size plus 1 to 2 mm in the first 50 implants (group A, n = 48). Following continuous echo assessment, sizing policy was changed to annulus size plus 3 to 4 mm in the next 60 implants (group B, n = 55). Sinotubular (ST) junction was kept within 115% of the annulus size by surgical remodeling of aortic root. In comparison with group A, group B had a 7% larger valve size (25.2 ± 2.1 mm v 23.6 ± 2.3, mm, P < .01) implanted for patients of same body surface area and left ventricular cavity size. However, group B has a 38% lower mean pressure gradient (4.0 ± 2.7 v 6.5 ± 3.2, mm Hg, P < .01), a 32% greater effective orifice area (2.3 ± 0.9 cm2 v 1.7 ± 0.7 cm2, P < .01), better root distensibility (9.3% ± 6.0% v 6.8% ± 4.1%, P = .026), and a lower ratio of ST junction to valve size (0.92 ± 0.13 v 0.99 ± 0.14, P = .009). Group B also had lower grade of prosthesis regurgitation (0.35 ± 0.62 v 0.89 ± 1.1, P = .002). Sizing of pericardial stentless aortic valves by annulus diameter plus 3 to 4 mm provides better valve competence and hemodynamic efficiency by improving aortic root geometry and distensibility. Pericardial stentless valves may be of advantage in elderly patients with significant geometric root mismatch. Copyright © 2001 by W.B. Saunders Company.


Journal article


Seminars in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Publication Date





55 - 59