Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 223

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Impact of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Cardiac Events and Midterm Mortality After Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Pure Aortic Stenosis

Tasca, Giordano, Mhagna, Zen, Perotti, Silvano, Centurini, Pietro Berra, Sabatini, Tony, Amaducci, Andrea, Brunelli, Federico, Cirillo, Marco, Tomba, Margherita Dalla, Quiani, Eugenio, Troise, Giovanni, Pibarot, Philippe·2006·Circulation

Abstract

Background— Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) occurs when the effective orifice area (EOA) of the prosthesis being implanted is too small in relation to body size, thus causing abnormally high transvalvular pressure gradients. The objective of this study was to examine the midterm impact of PPM on overall mortality and cardiac events after aortic valve replacement in patients with pure aortic stenosis. Methods and Results— The indexed EOA (EOAi) was estimated for each type and size of prosthesis being implanted in 315 consecutive patients with pure aortic stenosis. PPM was defined as an EOAi ≤0.80 cm 2 /m 2 and was correlated with overall mortality and cardiac events. PPM was present in 47% of patients. The 5-year overall survival and cardiac event-free survival were 82±3% and 75±4%, respectively, in patients with PPM compared with 93±3% and 87±4% in patients with no PPM ( P ≤0.01). In multivariate analysis, PPM was associated with a 4.2-fold (95% CI, 1.6 to 11.3) increase in the risk of overall mortality and 3.2-fold (95% CI, 1.5 to 6.8) increase in the risk of cardiac events. The other independent risk factors were history of heart failure, NHYA class III-IV, severe left ventricular hypertrophy, and absence of normal sinus rhythm before operation. Conclusions— PPM is an independent predictor of cardiac events and midterm mortality in patients with pure aortic stenosis undergoing aortic valve replacement. As opposed to other risk factors, PPM may be avoided or its severity may be reduced with the use of a preventive strategy at the time of operation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.105.587022

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 223

Metadata

Authors
Tasca, G., Mhagna, Z., Perotti, S., Centurini, P. B., Sabatini, T., Amaducci, A., Brunelli, F., Cirillo, M., Tomba, M. D., Quiani, E., Troise, G., & Pibarot, P.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2006-01-31
Volume
113
Issue
4
Pages
570-576
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2096877623
Cited by
223
References
1
FWCI
12.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impact of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Cardiac Events and Midterm Mortality After Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Pure Aortic Stenosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.105.587022
The paper
Tasca, G., Mhagna, Z., Perotti, S., Centurini, P. B., Sabatini, T., Amaducci, A., Brunelli, F., Cirillo, M., Tomba, M. D., Quiani, E., Troise, G., & Pibarot, P. (2006). Impact of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Cardiac Events and Midterm Mortality After Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Pure Aortic Stenosis. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.105.587022

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.