Original Research Article| Volume 7, ISSUE 4, P248-255, July 2013

Multidetector CT predictors of prosthesis–patient mismatch in transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Published:August 26, 2013DOI:



      Prosthesis–patient mismatch (PPM) is a predictor of mortality after aortic valve replacement (AVR).


      We examined whether accurate 3-dimensional annular sizing with multidetector CT (MDCT) is predictive of PPM after transcatheter AVR (TAVR).


      One hundred twenty-eight patients underwent MDCT then TAVR. Moderate PPM was defined as an indexed effective orifice area ≤0.85 cm2/m2 and severe ≤0.65 cm2/m2. MDCT annular measurements (area, short and long axis) were compared with the size of the selected transcatheter heart valve (THV) to obtain (1) the difference between prosthesis size and CT-measured mean annular diameter and (2) the percentage of undersizing or oversizing (calculated as 100 × [MDCT annular area – THV nominal area]/THV nominal area). In addition, the MDCT annular area was indexed to body surface area. These measures were evaluated as potential PPM predictors.


      We found that 42.2% of patients had moderate PPM and 9.4% had severe PPM. Procedural characteristics and in-hospital outcomes were similar between patients with or without PPM. THV undersizing of the mean aortic annulus diameter was not predictive of PPM (odds ratio [OR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.65–1.07; P = .16; area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.58). THV undersizing of annular area was not predictive of PPM (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.80–1.16; P = .69; AUC, 0.52). Indexed MDCT annular area was, however, predictive of PPM (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10–0.59; P < .001; AUC, 0.66).


      PPM is frequent after TAVR. Appropriate annular oversizing does not reduce the rate or severity of PPM. Patient annulus size mismatch, identified by indexed MDCT annular area, is a significant predictor of PPM.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      Full access to the journal is a member benefit for SCCT Members, Login via the SCCT website to access all journal content.


      Subscribe to Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Rahimtoola S.H.
        The problem of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch.
        Circulation. 1978; 58: 20-24
        • Pibarot P.
        • Dumesnil J.G.
        Prosthesis-patient mismatch: definition, clinical impact, and prevention.
        Heart. 2006; 92: 1022-1029
        • Del Rizzo D.F.
        • Abdoh A.
        • Cartier P.
        • Doty D.
        • Westaby S.
        Factors affecting left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement with stentless valves.
        Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1999; 11: 114-120
        • Tasca G.
        • Brunelli F.
        • Cirillo M.
        • et al.
        Impact of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch on left ventricular mass regression following aortic valve replacement.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 2005; 79: 505-510
        • Ruel M.
        • Rubens F.D.
        • Masters R.G.
        • et al.
        Late incidence and predictors of persistent or recurrent heart failure in patients with aortic prosthetic valves.
        J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2004; 127: 149-159
        • Blais C.
        • Dumesnil J.G.
        • Baillot R.
        • Simard S.
        • Doyle D.
        • Pibarot P.
        Impact of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch on short-term mortality after aortic valve replacement.
        Circulation. 2003; 108: 983-988
        • Rao V.
        • Jamieson W.R.
        • Ivanov J.
        • Armstrong S.
        • David T.E.
        Prosthesis-patient mismatch affects survival after aortic valve replacement.
        Circulation. 2000; 102: III5-III9
        • Tasca G.
        • Mhagna Z.
        • Perotti S.
        • et al.
        Impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch on cardiac events and midterm mortality after aortic valve replacement in patients with pure aortic stenosis.
        Circulation. 2006; 113: 570-576
        • Mohty D.
        • Dumesnil J.G.
        • Echahidi N.
        • et al.
        Impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch on long-term survival after aortic valve replacement: influence of age, obesity, and left ventricular dysfunction.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009; 53: 39-47
        • Smith C.R.
        • Leon M.B.
        • Mack M.J.
        • et al.
        Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients.
        N Engl J Med. 2011; 364: 2187-2198
        • Leon M.B.
        • Smith C.R.
        • Mack M.
        • et al.
        Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery.
        N Engl J Med. 2010; 363: 1597-1607
        • Kukucka M.
        • Pasic M.
        • Dreysse S.
        • et al.
        Patient-prosthesis mismatch after transapical aortic valve implantation: Incidence and impact on survival.
        J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013; 145: 391-397
        • Jilaihawi H.
        • Chin D.
        • Spyt T.
        • et al.
        Prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the Medtronic-Corevalve bioprosthesis.
        Eur Heart J. 2010; 31: 857-864
        • Clavel M.A.
        • Webb J.G.
        • Pibarot P.
        • et al.
        Comparison of the hemodynamic performance of percutaneous and surgical bioprostheses for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009; 53: 1883-1891
        • Giannini C.
        • Petronio A.S.
        • Nardi C.
        • et al.
        Left ventricular reverse remodeling in percutaneous and surgical aortic bioprostheses: an echocardiographic study.
        J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2011; 24: 28-36
        • Tzikas A.
        • Piazza N.
        • Geleijnse M.L.
        • et al.
        Prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the medtronic CoreValve system in patients with aortic stenosis.
        Am J Cardiol. 2010; 106: 255-260
        • Ewe S.H.
        • Muratori M.
        • Delgado V.
        • et al.
        Hemodynamic and clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011; 58: 1910-1918
        • Piazza N.
        • de Jaegere P.
        • Schultz C.
        • Becker A.E.
        • Serruys P.W.
        • Anderson R.H.
        Anatomy of the aortic valvar complex and its implications for transcatheter implantation of the aortic valve.
        Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2008; 1: 74-81
        • Gurvitch R.
        • Webb J.G.
        • Yuan R.
        • et al.
        Aortic annulus diameter determination by multidetector computed tomography: reproducibility, applicability, and implications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
        JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011; 4: 1235-1245
        • Willson A.B.
        • Webb J.G.
        • Labounty T.M.
        • et al.
        3-Dimensional aortic annular assessment by multidetector computed tomography predicts moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a multicenter retrospective analysis.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 59: 1287-1294
        • Webb J.G.
        • Chandavimol M.
        • Thompson C.R.
        • et al.
        Percutaneous aortic valve implantation retrograde from the femoral artery.
        Circulation. 2006; 113: 842-850
        • Lichtenstein S.V.
        • Cheung A.
        • Ye J.
        • et al.
        Transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation in humans: initial clinical experience.
        Circulation. 2006; 114: 591-596
        • Achenbach S.A.
        • Delgado V.
        • Min J.K.
        • Schoenhagen P.
        • Leipsic J.
        SCCT expert consensus document on computed tomography imaging before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)/transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).
        J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2012; 6: 366-380
        • Leipsic J.
        • Gurvitch R.
        • Labounty T.M.
        • et al.
        Multidetector computed tomography in transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
        JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011; 4: 416-429
        • Messika-Zeitoun D.
        • Serfaty J.M.
        • Brochet E.
        • et al.
        Multimodal assessment of the aortic annulus diameter: implications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010; 55: 186-194
        • Schultz C.J.
        • Moelker A.
        • Piazza N.
        • et al.
        Three dimensional evaluation of the aortic annulus using multislice computer tomography: are manufacturer's guidelines for sizing for percutaneous aortic valve replacement helpful?.
        Eur Heart J. 2010; 31: 849-856
        • Zamorano J.L.
        • Badano L.P.
        • Bruce C.
        • et al.
        EAE/ASE recommendations for the use of echocardiography in new transcatheter interventions for valvular heart disease.
        J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2011; 24: 937-965
        • Zoghbi W.A.
        • Chambers J.B.
        • Dumesnil J.G.
        • et al.
        Recommendations for evaluation of prosthetic valves with echocardiography and doppler ultrasound: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography's Guidelines and Standards Committee and the Task Force on Prosthetic Valves, developed in conjunction with the American College of Cardiology Cardiovascular Imaging Committee, Cardiac Imaging Committee of the American Heart Association, the European Association of Echocardiography, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology, the Japanese Society of Echocardiography and the Canadian Society of Echocardiography, endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation, American Heart Association, European Association of Echocardiography, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology, the Japanese Society of Echocardiography, and Canadian Society of Echocardiography.
        J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2009; 22 ([quiz 1082–1014]): 975-1014
        • Castro L.J.
        • Arcidi Jr., J.M.
        • Fisher A.L.
        • Gaudiani V.A.
        Routine enlargement of the small aortic root: a preventive strategy to minimize mismatch.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 2002; 74 ([discussion 36]): 31-36
        • Kulik A.
        • Al-Saigh M.
        • Chan V.
        • et al.
        Enlargement of the small aortic root during aortic valve replacement: is there a benefit?.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 2008; 85: 94-100
        • Botzenhardt F.
        • Eichinger W.B.
        • Bleiziffer S.
        • et al.
        Hemodynamic comparison of bioprostheses for complete supra-annular position in patients with small aortic annulus.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005; 45: 2054-2060
        • Botzenhardt F.
        • Eichinger W.B.
        • Guenzinger R.
        • et al.
        Hemodynamic performance and incidence of patient-prosthesis mismatch of the complete supraannular perimount magna bioprosthesis in the aortic position.
        Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005; 53: 226-230
        • Dalmau M.J.
        • Gonzalez-Santos J.M.
        • Blazquez J.A.
        • et al.
        Hemodynamic performance of the Medtronic Mosaic and Perimount Magna aortic bioprostheses: five-year results of a prospectively randomized study.
        Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011; 39 ([discussion 852]): 844-852
        • Pibarot P.
        • Dumesnil J.G.
        Prosthetic heart valves: selection of the optimal prosthesis and long-term management.
        Circulation. 2009; 119: 1034-1048
        • Bleiziffer S.
        • Eichinger W.B.
        • Hettich I.
        • et al.
        Prediction of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch prior to aortic valve replacement: which is the best method?.
        Heart. 2007; 93: 615-620
        • Moon M.R.
        • Pasque M.K.
        • Munfakh N.A.
        • et al.
        Prosthesis-patient mismatch after aortic valve replacement: impact of age and body size on late survival.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 2006; 81 ([discussion 489]): 481-488