loading page

MITRAL PROSTHETIC SIZE PREDICTOR IN MINIMALLY INVASIVE MITRAL VALVE REPLACEMENT
  • +5
  • Anh Vo,
  • Nguyen Nguyen,
  • Khoi Le,
  • Nguyen Vuong,
  • Trang Nguyen,
  • Thanh Vu,
  • Sy Hoang,
  • Dinh Nguyen
Anh Vo
Ho Chi Minh City Medical and Pharmaceutical University Hospital
Author Profile
Nguyen Nguyen
Ho Chi Minh City Medical and Pharmaceutical University Hospital
Author Profile
Khoi Le
Ho Chi Minh City Medical and Pharmaceutical University Hospital
Author Profile
Nguyen Vuong
Ho Chi Minh City Medical and Pharmaceutical University Hospital
Author Profile
Trang Nguyen
Ho Chi Minh City Medical and Pharmaceutical University Hospital
Author Profile
Thanh Vu
Ho Chi Minh City Medical and Pharmaceutical University Hospital
Author Profile
Sy Hoang
Ho Chi Minh City Medical and Pharmaceutical University Hospital
Author Profile
Dinh Nguyen
Ho Chi Minh City Medical and Pharmaceutical University Hospital
Author Profile

Peer review status:Published

Published in Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery volume 15 issue 1. 2020. 10.1186/s13019-020-01197-w

Abstract

Background: Minimally invasive mitral valve replacement has become popular across the world. However, annular rupture and patient – prosthetic mismatch (PPM) are still problematic, particularly in the Asian population. To avoid this, a predictor model could be beneficial. Our study aimed to assess the value of mitral valve diameters measured on TTE and CT scan on predicting the actual mitral prostheses. Methods: From January 2018 to December 2019, a total number of 96 patients underwent minimally invasive mitral valve replacement. The association between imaging measurements with the outcome was checked by scatter plot and Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Univariable linear regression was used to build the prediction model. Results: The three strongest correlation for the whole population are the following features: Mean TTE diameter (0.702), mean diameter on CT lowest plane through the mitral annulus (0.679), area-derived diameter on CT highest plane through the mitral annulus (0.665). The prosthetic size of the tissue valve group seemed to be more correlated to the calculated annulus diameters than that of the mechanical valve group. Tissue valve size predictor models based on these calculated diameters were 16.19 + 0.27  d (r = 0.744), 12.74 + 0.44  d (r = 0.756) and 12.79 + 0.38  d (r = 0.730), respectively. Conclusion: Mitral prosthetic size could be predicted with the mitral diameters measured on TTE and CT scan. The overall correlation coefficient varied from 0.665 (CT Scan) to 0.702 (TTE). These models performed better when applied to bioprosthesis.