Patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) occurs when an implanted prosthetic valve is too small for the patient; severe PPM is defined as an indexed effective orifice area (iEOA) <0.65 cm2/m2 following aortic valve replacement (AVR). This review examines articles from the past 10 years addressing the prevalence, outcomes and options for prevention and treatment of PPM after AVR. Prevalence of PPM ranges from 8% to almost 80% in individual studies. PPM is thought to have an impact on mortality, mainly in patients with severe PPM, although severe PPM accounts for only 10–15% of cases. Outcomes of patients with moderate PPM are not significantly different to those without PPM. PPM is associated with higher rates of perioperative stroke and renal failure and lack of left ventricular mass regression. Predictors include female sex, older age, hypertension, diabetes, renal failure and higher surgical risk score. PPM may be a marker of comorbidity rather than a risk factor for adverse outcomes. PPM should be suspected in patients with persistent cardiac symptoms after AVR when there is high prosthetic valve velocity or gradient and a small calculated effective orifice area. After exclusion of other causes of increased transvalvular gradient, re-intervention may be considered if symptoms persist and are unresponsive to medical therapy. However, this decision needs to consider the available options to relieve PPM and whether expected benefits justify the risk of intervention. The only effective intervention is redo surgery with implantation of a larger valve and/or annular enlargement. Therefore, focus needs to be on prevention.

Objective: To examine the influence of prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stay on quality of life and recovery following cardiac surgery. Methods: Quality of life was assessed using the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF36). The Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale was used to assess quality of recovery, disability, and cognition after ICU discharge over 12 months' follow-up. Prolonged ICU stay was defined as !3 postoperative days. Mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were recorded up to 12 months.

Conventional surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) is the ‘gold standard’ for treatment of severe or symptomatic aortic valve stenosis. The increasing age of patients and increasing comorbidities has led to the development of procedures to minimise operative time and reduce risks of surgery. One method of reducing operative times is the use of sutureless aortic valves (SU-AVR). We examine the current literature surrounding the use of SU-AVR. Alternatives to AVR are SU-AVR, sometimes referred to as rapid deployment valves, or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). TAVI has been demonstrated to be superior over medical therapy in patients deemed inoperable and non-inferior in high and intermediate-risk patients compared with surgical AVR. However, the lack of excision of the calcified aortic valve and annulus raises concerns regarding long-term durability and possibly thromboembolic complications. TAVI patients have increased rates of paravalvular leaks, major vascular complications and pacemaker implantation when compared with conventional AVR. SU-AVR minimises the need for suturing, leading to reduced operative times, while enabling complete removal of the calcified valve. The increase in use of SU-AVR has been mostly driven by minimally invasive surgery. Other indications include patients with a small and/or calcified aortic root, as well as patients requiring AVR and concomitant surgery. SU-AVR is associated with decreased operative times and possibly improved haemodynamics when compared with conventional AVR. However, this has to be weighed against the increased risk of paravalvular leak and pacemaker implantation when deciding which prosthesis to use for AVR.

Both genetic and haemodynamic theories explain the aetiology, progression and optimal management of bicuspid aortic valve aortopathy. In recent years, the haemodynamic theory has been explored with the help of magnetic resonance imaging and computational fluid dynamics. The objective of this review was to summarize the findings of these investigations with focus on the blood flow pattern and associated variables, including flow eccentricity, helicity, flow displacement, cusp opening angle, systolic flow angle, wall shear stress (WSS) and oscillatory shear index. A structured literature review was performed from January 1990 to January 2018 and revealed the following 3 main findings: (i) the bicuspid aortic valve is associated with flow eccentricity and helicity in the ascending aorta compared to healthy and diseased tricuspid aortic valve, (ii) flow displacement is easier to obtain than WSS and has been shown to correlate with valve morphology and type of aortopathy and (iii) the stenotic bicuspid aortic valve is associated with elevated WSS along the greater curvature of the ascending aorta, where aortic dilatation and aortic wall thinning are commonly found. We conclude that new haemodynamic variables should complement ascending aorta diameter as an indicator for disease progression and the type and timing of intervention. WSS describes the force that blood flow exerts on the vessel wall as a function of viscosity and geometry of the vessel, making it a potentially more reliable marker of disease progression.

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link: