Article

Hemodynamics of high-performance bileaflet valves: Comparison to simulated clinical Doppler measurements

Clinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Medical Faculty RWTH, Aachen, Germany.
The Journal of heart valve disease (Impact Factor: 0.75). 08/2006; 15(4):549-56.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

The newly designed, so-called 'high performance' bileaflet heart valve prostheses are suggested to be especially beneficial in small sizes. Herein, valvular energy loss and transvalvular gradients were evaluated using an in-vitro pulsatile flow model for aortic prostheses (St. Jude Medical Regent and On-X, sizes 19-23 mm). Gradients were compared with simulated clinically derived Doppler gradients to determine the extent of pressure recovery.
Valves were analyzed using a pulsatile circulatory mock loop simulator at heart rates of 70 and 110 bpm, and at cardiac outputs of 2, 4, 5, and 7 l/min, respectively (FDA requirements). Measurements consisted of computed calculation of energy loss and determination of mean pressure gradient by pressure transducers. A Doppler probe was mounted into the device for simultaneous measurement of Doppler gradient according to the Bernoulli equation.
The systolic energy loss of the SJM Regent valve averaged 5.0 +/- 4.6% (range: 0.2 to 14.9%) of the effective forward energy, while that for the On-X valve was 6.5% (range: 0.7-22.8%). Total energy loss was 9.9% (range: 4.8-22.1%) for the SJM Regent valve, and 12.7% (range: 6.5-27.7%) for the On-X valve. The average extent of pressure recovery was 64% for both valve types.
All tested valves were characterized by excellent hemodynamic performance, with overall low systolic and total energy losses, but results were slightly favorable for the SJM Regent valve. Valve performance was concluded to be much better than expected by clinical routine Doppler measurements, which significantly overestimates transvalvular gradients; this effect was explained by pressure recovery. Nevertheless, Doppler gradient remains a valuable follow up technique for patients with heart valve prostheses.

Full-text preview

Available from: icr-heart.com
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: (ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, Volume 25, October 2008)
    No preview · Article · Nov 2008 · Echocardiography
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Four different bileaflet mechanical prostheses are currently utilized for valve replacement in the United States. We reviewed the different designs, hemodynamic features, and long-term outcomes of each of these prostheses. Bileaflet mechanical valves provide excellent long-term durability and overall superb hemodynamic performance. Subtle design modifications have maximized the effective orifice area per given valve size, which minimizes outflow gradients in smaller sizes. These newer-generation valves require a lower level of anticoagulation compared with older models. Compared with bioprosthetic valves, freedom from structural valve deterioration and reoperation is significantly better with bileaflet mechanical valves. However, hemorrhagic and thromboembolic complications related to anticoagulation remain a major limitation. Bileaflet mechanical valves are a valuable option for patients undergoing valve replacement surgery. All of the bileaflet designs provide good hemodynamic performance with long-term durability. However, some designs may provide better hemodynamic profiles in smaller valve sizes. Furthermore, newer models may have a more favorable thromboembolic profile. Nonetheless, the risk of anticoagulant-related complications with mechanical valves must be weighed against the risks of structural deterioration and reoperation of bioprostheses. Ultimately, the choice of prosthesis should be made after careful discussion with the patient, referring cardiologist, and cardiac surgeon.
    No preview · Article · Apr 2009 · Current opinion in cardiology
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Since Doppler echocardiography takes no account of pressure recovery, the true hemodynamic burden of aortic valve prostheses remains vague. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the methodological error of Doppler gradient estimation by means of a model demonstrating the different influence of aortic root diameters on net and Doppler gradients, respectively. This matters especially in small valves and the related patient/prosthesis mismatch calculation. Two bileaflet small aortic valve prostheses (19 mm SJM Regent® and On-X® valve) were tested using a pulsatile circulatory mock loop simulator with two different aortic models: one with statistically normal diameters according to annular size, another one simulating an aortic aneurysm of 50 mm. Doppler and simultaneously recorded net gradients as well as systolic energy losses were obtained for different hemodynamic conditions. In all measurements a significant amount of pressure recovery was observed. In cases of aortic aneurysm systolic energy loss increased significantly for each cardiac output at each heart rate ( P < 0.0028), reflected by a significant ( P < 0.0001) increase in net gradients. The corresponding Doppler gradients were unchanged. This indicates significantly less pressure recovery ( P < 0.0001) in the aneurysmatic aorta. Geometry of the ascending aorta considerably alters aortic valve hemodynamic parameters. The hemodynamic function of small aortic valve prostheses, especially with corresponding normal outflow dimensions, is much better than expected from Doppler gradients. Thus, calculation of a patient/prosthesis mismatch can be misleading.
    No preview · Article · May 2011 · The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon
Show more