{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025561580170410533, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010069713400464756, 'mean_word_length': 5.4575, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 3, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Quantification of haemodynamic performance of stented and stentless aortic bioprostheses and potential influence on survival.

BACKGROUND
The goal of aortic valve replacement is relief of symptoms, optimisation of haemodynamics, regression of left ventricular mass and advancement of survival. The objective of this review article is to provide the evidence-to-date on the clinical performance of stented and stentless heterograft bioprostheses with regard to haemodynamics, durability and survival.


METHODS
The haemodynamic advantage of aortic valve replacement prostheses is judged on ability to minimise postoperative gradients and to optimise the normalisation of left ventricular mass and function. The most frequent cause of high postoperative gradients occurs when the effective prosthetic valve area is less than that of the normal human valve. The effective orifice area index (EOAI) of >/= 0.85 cm(2)/m(2) is considered optimal to prevent patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) at rest and exercise.


RESULTS
The stented bioprostheses contribute to obstructive non-physiological flow patterns whereas stentless bioprostheses provide laminar non-obstructive flow. The stentless bioprostheses have been shown to have larger effective orifice areas and lower gradients. Mismatch is decreased with stentless bioprostheses especially when prosthesis size is </=21 mm. Left ventricular mass (LVM) postoperatively has been shown to relate to baseline LVM index (LVMI) and PPM. The EOAI >0.8 cm(2)/m(2) provides the best long-term regression of LVM. It has been identified that a tendency for PPM in sizes 21 and 23 mm stented bioprostheses did not prevent adequate achievement of appropriate LVMI. Survival at 5 years favoured stentless over stented bioprostheses for patients <70 years, but not in patients >/= _70 years of age. The durability comparison of the stentless bioprostheses must wait until 10-15 years experience is achieved. There is preliminary evidence that uneven shear stress on the leaflet of a regurgitant stentless bioprosthesis can accelerate leaflet tears at the level of the commissures. Dilation of the aortic root and, particularly, the sinotubular junction, can cause progressive stentless valve insufficiency.


CONCLUSIONS
The long-term performance advantages or disadvantages of stentless bioprostheses compared to stented bioprostheses will require at least another 5-7 years of cumulative stentless bioprostheses experience. Surgeons can use an algorithm intraoperatively to prevent patient-prosthesis mismatch while choosing the optimal prosthesis.