Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 25, 2026

Full-root Aortic Valve Replacement by Stentless Aortic Xenografts in Patients with Small Aortic Roots
Published on: May 21, 2017
Aortic Valve Replacement With Carpentier-Edwards: Hemodynamic Outcomes for the 19-mm Valve
Ji Hoon You1, Dong Seop Jeong2, Kiick Sung2
1Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea; Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul Veterans Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Insights
The 19-mm Carpentier-Edwards pericardial bioprosthesis shows acceptable hemodynamic performance and clinical outcomes in aortic stenosis patients. This small bioprosthesis is comparable to larger valves, with no significant differences in survival or complications.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Surgery
- Biomedical Engineering
- Clinical Outcomes Research
Background:
- Aortic stenosis necessitates aortic valve replacement (AVR).
- The Carpentier-Edwards pericardial bioprosthesis is a common AVR option.
- Comparisons between smaller (19-mm) and larger bioprostheses are crucial for optimizing patient outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the hemodynamic performance and clinical outcomes of the 19-mm Carpentier-Edwards pericardial bioprosthesis against larger valves in patients with aortic stenosis.
- To evaluate the impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch on outcomes.
Main Methods:
- A retrospective study of 447 patients undergoing AVR for aortic stenosis between 1998 and 2013.
- Patients were grouped by implanted valve size: 19-mm (n=54), 21-mm (n=154), and 23-27 mm (n=239).
- Transthoracic echocardiography assessed in vivo effective orifice area index at 12 months; mean follow-up was 4.9 years.
Main Results:
- Overall survival at 10 years was 84.1%, unaffected by patient-prosthesis mismatch.
- The 19-mm group, despite being older and having more mismatch, showed no significant differences in early outcomes, survival, or cardiac mortality compared to larger valves.
- Independent mortality risk factors included age, male gender, coronary artery bypass graft, and low hemoglobin.
Conclusions:
- The Carpentier-Edwards pericardial bioprosthesis, including the 19-mm size, demonstrates acceptable clinical outcomes and hemodynamic function.
- Smaller bioprostheses can be safely used in selected patients with aortic stenosis.
- Further research may explore long-term durability and specific patient selection criteria.
Background:
To compare hemodynamic performance and clinical outcomes after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis with the 19-mm Carpentier-Edwards pericardial bioprosthesis versus larger valves.
Methods:
Between January 1998 and December 2013, 447 consecutive patients underwent aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis with the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount (n = 61) or Magna bioprostheses (n = 386). Based on the implanted valve size, the patients were classified into three groups: a 19-mm group (n = 54), a 21-mm group (n = 154), and a 23-mm to 27-mm group (n = 239). The in vivo effective orifice area index was measured by transthoracic echocardiography 12 months after operation (n = 331). The mean follow-up time was 4.9 ± 3.5 (maximum 15.4) years.
Results:
There were three early deaths (0.7%). At 10 years, overall survival (84.1%) was unaffected by patient-prosthesis mismatch (18.7%, 62 patients), and freedom from structural valve deterioration and endocarditis was 100% and 97.1%, respectively. Although the 19-mm group was significantly older and had a higher incidence of patient-prosthesis mismatch (n = 14, 30.4%), there were no significant differences in early outcomes, overall survival, cardiac-related mortality, or serial reduction of left ventricular mass index in comparison with patients with a larger bioprostheses. Independent risk factors for all-cause mortality were age, male gender, combined coronary artery bypass graft, and low hemoglobin level.
Conclusion:
The Carpentier-Edwards pericardial bioprosthesis appears to be associated with acceptable clinical outcomes and hemodynamic profile.
Related Concept Videos
Aortic Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests
Aortic Regurgitation III: Medical Management

