Aims  Indexed effective orifice area (EOAi) charts are used to determine the likelihood of prosthesis–patient mismatch (PPM) after aortic valve replacement (AVR). The aim of this study is to validate whether these EOAi charts, based on echocardiographic normal reference values, can accurately predict PPM. Methods and results  In the PERIcardial SurGical AOrtic Valve ReplacemeNt (PERIGON) Pivotal Trial, 986 patients with aortic valve stenosis/regurgitation underwent AVR with an Avalus valve. Patients were randomly split (50:50) into training and test sets. The mean measured EOAs for each valve size from the training set were used to create an Avalus EOAi chart. This chart was subsequently used to predict PPM in the test set and measures of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive value) were assessed. PPM was defined by an EOAi ≤0.85 cm2/m2, and severe PPM was defined as EOAi ≤0.65 cm2/m2. The reference values obtained from the training set ranged from 1.27 cm2 for size 19 mm up to 1.81 cm2 for size 27 mm. The test set had an incidence of 66% of PPM and 24% of severe PPM. The EOAi chart inaccurately predicted PPM in 30% of patients and severe PPM in 22% of patients. For the prediction of PPM, the sensitivity was 87% and the specificity 37%. For the prediction of severe PPM, the sensitivity was 13% and the specificity 98%. Conclusion  The use of echocardiographic normal reference values for EOAi charts to predict PPM is unreliable due to the large proportion of misclassifications.

OBJECTIVES To improve haemodynamic performance, design modifications of prosthetic valves have been proposed with each new generation of valves. These different designs also impact the amount of mechanical wear, because mechanical stresses are distributed differently. Because long-term evidence for new prosthetic valves is lacking, this in vitro study compared hydrodynamic performance and durability among 3 currently available bioprosthetic valves with internally (IMLV) or externally mounted leaflets (EMLV). METHODS Prostheses of the internally mounted Medtronic Avalus and Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna Ease valves were compared to prostheses of the externally mounted Abbott Trifecta valve. For each labelled size (e.g. 19, 21 and 23) of the 3 types, 3 valves underwent accelerated wear testing for up to 600 million cycles, corresponding to ∼15 years of simulated wear. The valves underwent hydrodynamic testing and visual inspection. RESULTS EMLV had the largest effective orifice area and lowest pressure gradient for each labelled size at baseline and 600 million cycles; the effective orifice area and the pressure gradient were equivalent for the 2 types of IMLV. Five of 9 EMLVs had at least 1 hole or tear in the leaflet tissue around the stent posts, which resulted in severe regurgitation at 500 million cycles in 2 cases. All IMLVs were intact at 600 million cycles with minimal tissue wear. CONCLUSIONS EMLV showed superior hydrodynamic performance but inferior mechanical durability compared to IMLV after 600 million cycles of testing. The primary failures were because of significant mechanical abrasion in the commissural region, which may warrant close monitoring of EMLV during long-term follow-up.

Background: Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), routinely used to characterize the degree of hemodynamic obstruction caused by a prosthetic heart valve, is associated with adverse patient outcomes after aortic valve replacement (AVR). In the common definition of PPM, the opening area of the valve is related to the patients' cardiac output, by indexing effective orifice area (EOA) with body surface area (BSA). The aim of this study is to assess the implications of using BSA as a proxy for cardiac output.Methods: 744 patients with normal LV function underwent echocardiographic assessment after surgical AVR. To validate the use of BSA as a proxy for cardiac output, the relation between these variables was analysed. The effects of BSA on the classification of PPM (EOAi < 0.85 cm 2 /m 2 ) and the presence of hemodynamic obstruction (mean gradient ≥ 20 mmHg and/or Doppler velocity index < 0.35) were estimated.Results: There was a weak correlation between BSA and cardiac output (r: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.22;0.35), and cardiac output was not proportional to BSA (Cardiac output = 1.5 x BSA +1.9). As a result, the increased risk of patients with a large BSA to be labelled with PPM (OR: 5.2, 95% CI: 2.5;11 per m 2 BSA), was not reflected by a significantly higher risk of hemodynamic obstruction (OR: 1.5, 95% CI: 0.5;4.9 per m 2 BSA). Conclusions:The current definition of PPM results in a systematic overestimation of hemodynamic obstruction in patients with a larger BSA, and we recommend cautious use in this subgroup.

Background A dedicated operating team is defined as a surgical team consisting of the same group of people working together over time, optimally attuned in both technical and/or communicative aspects. This can be achieved through technical and/or communicative training in a team setting. A dedicated surgical team may contribute to the optimization of healthcare quality and patient safety within the perioperative period. Method A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effects of a dedicated surgical team on clinical and performance outcomes. MEDLINE and Embase were searched on 23 June 2022. Both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRSs) were included. Primary outcomes were mortality, complications and readmissions. Secondary outcomes were costs and performance measures. Results Fourteen studies were included (RCTs n = 1; NRSs n = 13). Implementation of dedicated operating teams was associated with improvements in mortality, turnover time, teamwork, communication and costs. No significant differences were observed in readmission rates and length of hospital stay. Results regarding duration, glitch counts and complications of surgery were inconclusive. Limitations include study conduct and heterogeneity between studies. Conclusions The institution of surgical teams who followed communicative and/or technical training appeared to have beneficial effects on several clinical outcome measures. Dedicated teams provide a feasible way of improving healthcare quality and patient safety. A dose–response effect of team training was reported, but also a relapse rate, suggesting that repetitive training is of major concern to high-quality patient care. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings, due to limited level of evidence in current literature. Prospero registration number CRD42020145288