[Comparative study of Toronto SPV prosthesis and bileaflet mechanical aortic prosthesis with 2D-Doppler echocardiography].

Aim: The aim of this study was to make a noninvasive comparison, by means of Doppler echocardiography, of the hemodynamic performance of biological stentless xenografts and mechanical bileaflet (MB) prostheses (P) in aortic position.
Methods: We studied 20 patients (pts) with normofunctional (nf) aortic Toronto (T) Stentless Porcine valves (SPV)--Group I--8 males, aged 69 +/- 12 years, 32 +/- 9 months after surgery, and 30 pts with nf MB aortic P (Carbomedics or St. Jude Medical)--Group II--17 males (p = NS vs G I), aged 61 +/- 12 years (p < 0.01 vs G I), 30 +/- 12 months after implantation (p = NS vs G I). Both groups were comparable with regard to body surface area and surgical indication. P diameters ranged from 21 to 25 mm (G I: 22.9 +/- 1.7; G II: 22.8 +/- 1.7 - p = NS), the number of pts with the same P diameter in each group being similar. We analysed, at rest: aortic orifice diameter (AoOd - cm), maximal (GMax) and mean (GMean) transprosthesic pressure gradients, P functional area (PFA) and P resistance (PRes). Gradients (mm Hg) were calculated by means of the Bernoulli equation, PFA (cm2) by means of the continuity equation and PRes (dynes.s.cm-5) as 1333 x Gmean x SEP/SV (SEP = systolic ejection period; SV = stroke volume).
Results: AoOd (G I vs G II): P 21--1.78 +/- 0.04 vs 2.00 +/- 0.10 (p < 0.001); P 23--1.91 +/- 0.10 vs 2.19 +/- 0.10 (p = 0.01); P 25--2.22 +/- 0.24 vs 2.29 +/- 0.19 (NS). Doppler parameters: [table: see text]
Conclusions: P T SPV show better hemodynamic performance when compared to P MB with the same diameter, in aortic position. In addition, our results suggest that P T SPV allow the use of larger valve sizes for the same aortic orifice diameter.