PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Ronak Rajani

Publications and source records attributed to Ronak Rajani.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

The subcoronary Toronto stentless versus supra-annular Perimount stented replacement aortic valve: early clinical and hemodynamic results of a randomized comparison in 160 patients.

BACKGROUND: A stentless valve is expected to be hemodynamically superior to a stented valve. The aim of this study was to compare early postoperative hemodynamic function and clinical events in a randomized, prospective series of 160 stentless and stented biological replacement aortic valves. METHODS: We randomized 160 consecutive patients on 1 surgeon's list to receive either a Toronto stentless porcine valve (St Jude Medical, Inc, St Paul, Minn) or a Perimount stented bovine pericardial valve (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, Calif). Echocardiography was performed at discharge, between 3 and 6 months, and at 1 year after surgery. Statistical analysis was performed by both intention to treat and actual valves implanted. RESULTS: The mean labeled size of both designs of valve was 24.7. There were no statistically significant differences in results at any time interval or whether analysis was performed by actual valves implanted or intention to treat. At 3 to 6 months for the Toronto versus the Perimount valve, the effective orifice area was 1.58 versus 1.66 cm2, the mean pressure difference was 7.54 versus 7.42 mm Hg, and the peak velocity was 2.07 versus 2.0.1 m/s. There was no difference in mortality, regression of left ventricular hypertrophy, or complications other than paraprosthetic regurgitation at 12 months or on follow-up for a proportion of the sample to 8 years. The incidence of regurgitation through the valves was similar for Toronto (10%) and Perimount (13.8%) at 1 year, but mild paraprosthetic regurgitation was found in 5 patients with the Perimount valve and none with Toronto valves. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in hemodynamic function or clinical events between the stented and stentless biological valves chosen for comparison in the early postoperative period or in preliminary follow-up to 5 years.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

The peak to mean pressure decrease ratio: a new method of assessing aortic stenosis.

BACKGROUND: The ratio of peak to mean pressure decrease is a new measure of transaortic continuous waveform shape that could be useful for grading aortic stenosis. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed echocardiograms in 163 patients with all grades of aortic stenosis as assessed by the continuity equation. RESULTS: The peak to mean pressure decrease ratio was 1.75 (0.14) in mild stenosis, 1.66 (0.13) in moderate stenosis, 1.56 (0.10) in severe stenosis, and 1.57 (0.07) in severe aortic stenosis with left ventricular ejection fraction less than 40%. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that a threshold of less than 1.50 gave a specificity of 94% against continuity area whereas a ratio less than 1.75 gave a sensitivity of 96%. CONCLUSION: The peak to mean pressure decrease ratio is a simple and quick cue to the likelihood of severe aortic stenosis in patients with low left ventricular ejection fraction when transaortic pressure decreases appear only moderate.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Hemodynamic performance on exercise: comparison of a stentless and stented biological aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Although stentless valves are expected to be hemodynamically superior to stented valves, the results of comparative trials have been inconsistent. The study aim was to compare hemodynamic function at rest and on exercise in 50 stentless and stented biological replacement aortic valves METHODS: Twenty-one patients with a Toronto stentless porcine valve and 29 with a Perimount stented bovine pericardial valve were exercised using a bicycle ergometer. Echocardiography was performed before, and during exercise testing. RESULTS: Patients with either valve type were exercised to a similar degree. Transaortic resistance was slightly lower in the Perimount compared with the Toronto at rest (p = 0.03) and at peak exercise (p = 0.04), and flow was higher in the Perimount at rest (p = 0.007), but not at peak exercise. There were no significant differences between the valve types in peak velocity, mean pressure difference or effective orifice area either at rest or on peak exercise. CONCLUSION: There were no clinically significant differences in hemodynamic function between the stented and stentless biological valves chosen for comparison either at rest or during bicycle exercise.

Aged↗