Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 2, 2026

Full-root Aortic Valve Replacement by Stentless Aortic Xenografts in Patients with Small Aortic Roots
Published on: May 21, 2017
The effect of patient-prosthesis mismatch on survival after aortic and mitral valve replacement: a 10 year, single
Sudeep Das De1, Ashok Nanjappa2, Karim Morcos2
1Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Glasgow, UK. sdasde@gmail.com.
Background:
The evidence on the impact of patient-prosthesis Mismatch (PPM) on survival thus far has been conflicting. The aim of this study was to 1) study the effect of PPM on survival after isolated aortic and mitral valve replacement and 2) Assess the interaction between left ventricular function and PPM on survival.
Methods:
The study cohort was patients who underwent isolated Aortic valve replacement (AVR) and Mitral valve replacement (MVR) over a 10-year period from 2008 to 2018. PPM was defined using the projected indexed effective orifice area (EOAi). The cohort was divided into different groups based on the degree of PPM. The severity of PPM was classified using threshold values of EOAi used in the literature. The Kaplan- Meier method was used to compare survival by degree of PPM. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to generate adjusted hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals. An interactive term for ejection fraction (EF) was added to test whether EF modifies the effect of the PPM grade on survival. In addition, sub-group analysis based on left ventricular function was performed.
Results:
In the AVR cohort, there were a total of 1953 patients. The distribution of patients in the different PPM categories was as follows: no PPM 59.7%; moderate PPM 36.8%; severe PPM 3.5%. There was no significant difference in survival between the different groups. At 10 years, the adjusted HR between patients with severe PPM versus no PPM was 1.1(CI 0.5-2.4, p > 0.05) and the HR between those with moderate PPM versus no PPM was 0.97 (CI 0.74-1.23, p > 0.05). In the MVR cohort, there were a total of 298 patients. The distribution of PPM is as follows: no PPM 59.4%; and with PPM 40.6%. Again, there was no significant difference in survival between the groups. At 5 years, the adjusted HR between patients with PPM versus no PPM was 1.45 (CI 0.67-3.14, p > 0.05). In both groups, there was no significant interaction between left ventricular function (LVF) and degree of PPM on survival.
Conclusions:
In our study cohort, the degree of PPM was not an independent predictor of survival after AVR or MVR. There was also no significant interaction between LV function and degree of PPM on survival.
Insights
Patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) did not significantly impact survival after aortic or mitral valve replacement. Left ventricular function also did not interact with PPM to affect patient outcomes in this study.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Surgery
- Prosthetic Heart Valves
- Clinical Outcomes Research
Background:
- Conflicting evidence exists regarding the impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) on survival after valve replacement.
- This study aimed to clarify the relationship between PPM and survival following isolated aortic and mitral valve replacement.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the effect of PPM on survival after isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) and mitral valve replacement (MVR).
- To assess the interaction between left ventricular function and PPM in predicting survival outcomes.
Main Methods:
- A cohort of 1953 AVR and 298 MVR patients from 2008-2018 were analyzed.
- Patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) was defined by indexed effective orifice area (EOAi), with survival analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models.
- Interaction between ejection fraction (EF) and PPM on survival was tested, with subgroup analysis based on left ventricular function.
Main Results:
- In the AVR cohort, no significant difference in survival was observed across PPM severity groups (severe PPM vs. no PPM: adjusted HR 1.1; moderate PPM vs. no PPM: adjusted HR 0.97).
- In the MVR cohort, no significant survival difference was found between patients with and without PPM (PPM vs. no PPM: adjusted HR 1.45 at 5 years).
- No significant interaction was detected between left ventricular function and the degree of PPM on survival in either cohort.
Conclusions:
- The degree of patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) is not an independent predictor of survival after isolated aortic or mitral valve replacement.
- Left ventricular function does not significantly interact with PPM to influence survival outcomes in patients undergoing AVR or MVR.
Related Concept Videos
Mitral Valve Prolapse I: Introduction
Mitral Valve Prolapse II: Assessment and Management
Mitral Stenosis IV: Nursing Management
Mitral Stenosis I: Introduction
Mitral Valve Prolapse III: Nursing Management

