(Circulation. 1995;92:3464-3472.)
© 1995 American Heart Association, Inc.
Articles |
Pressure Recovery in Bileaflet Heart Valve Prostheses
Localized High Velocities and Gradients in Central and Side Orifices With Implications for Doppler-Catheter Gradient Relation in Aortic and Mitral Position
From the Cardiovascular Imaging Center, Departments of Cardiology (P.M.V., M.P., J.D.T.), Biomedical Engineering (N.L.G., K.A.P.), and Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (D.M.C.), Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio.
Correspondence to Pieter M. Vandervoort, MD, Department of Cardiology, Desk F15, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH.
Background We investigate pressure recovery in central and side orifices of St Jude valves and the effect of mitral versus aortic position on the relation between Doppler- and catheter-derived pressure gradients.
Methods and Results Maximum, transvalvular, and net pressure gradients are calculated and compared with Doppler-derived gradients in an in vitro model. Pressure recovery and pressure loss coefficients are calculated. Simultaneous Doppler and catheter gradients are obtained intraoperatively in five patients undergoing mitral valve replacement. Centerline Doppler gradients correspond closely with maximum catheter gradients but are higher than transvalvular and net pressure gradients. Thirty-six percent of the initial pressure drop is recovered between the valve leaflets and is independent of valve size or configuration. A variable amount of postvalvular pressure recovery is observed depending on aortic or mitral configuration. Side orifice velocities are 85±4% of the centerline velocities. Incorporation of the pressure loss coefficient in the simplified Bernoulli equation shows close agreement between centerline Doppler gradients and transvalvular gradients (r=.99, y=1.11x-0.19).
Conclusions Gradients across the St Jude valve measured by Doppler ultrasound are higher than transvalvular or net catheter gradients due to downstream pressure recovery. This is more marked for Doppler gradients based on centerline velocities than side orifice velocities and is more pronounced for valves in an aortic than a mitral configuration. Therefore, to be comparable with invasive transvalvular catheter gradients, either Doppler gradients should be calculated based on side orifice velocity measurements or the Doppler gradient calculation should include the pressure loss coefficient when based on central orifice velocities.
Key Words: prothesis • valves • pressure
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  J Mascherbauer and H Baumgartner The authors' reply: Heart, April 1, 2009; 95(7): 592 - 593. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Tanne, L. Kadem, R. Rieu, and P. Pibarot Hemodynamic impact of mitral prosthesis-patient mismatch on pulmonary hypertension: an in silico study J Appl Physiol, December 1, 2008; 105(6): 1916 - 1926. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. D. Thomas and Z. B. Popovic Assessment of Left Ventricular Function by Cardiac Ultrasound J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 21, 2006; 48(10): 2012 - 2025. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Ruel, H. Al-Faleh, A. Kulik, K. L. Chan, T. G. Mesana, and I. G. Burwash Prosthesis-patient mismatch after aortic valve replacement predominantly affects patients with preexisting left ventricular dysfunction: Effect on survival, freedom from heart failure, and left ventricular mass regression J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., May 1, 2006; 131(5): 1036 - 1044. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Amarelli, A. Della Corte, G. Romano, G. Iasevoli, G. Dialetto, L. S. De Santo, M. De Feo, M. Torella, M. Scardone, and M. Cotrufo Left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement with 17-mm St Jude Medical mechanical prostheses in isolated aortic stenosis J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., March 1, 2005; 129(3): 512 - 517. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. R. Rezaian, K. Aghasadeghi, and J. Kojuri Evaluation of the Hemodynamic Performance of St.Jude Mitral Prostheses: A Pilot Study by Dobutamine-Stress Doppler Echocardiography Angiology, January 1, 2005; 56(1): 81 - 86. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. E. Richards, D. Deserranno, E. Donal, N. L. Greenberg, J. D. Thomas, and M. J. Garcia Influence of structural geometry on the severity of bicuspid aortic stenosis Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, September 1, 2004; 287(3): H1410 - H1416. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. M. Albes, M. Hartrumpf, V. Rudolph, T. Krempl, E. Huttemann, R. Vollandt, and T. Wahlers Are mechanical valves with enhanced inner diameter advantageous in the small sized aortic annulus? Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 2003; 76(5): 1564 - 1570. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Teijeira Omniscience valve results: letter 2 Ann. Thorac. Surg., August 1, 2003; 76(2): 659 - 659. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. A. Vannan and K. Sarkar Assessment of mechanical aortic valve prosthesis by means of Doppler echocardiography: what to measure and why? J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., August 1, 2003; 126(2): 317 - 320. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Garcia, J. G. Dumesnil, L.-G. Durand, L. Kadem, and P. Pibarot Discrepancies between catheter and Doppler estimates of valve effective orifice area can be predicted from the pressure recovery phenomenon: practical implications with regard to quantification of aortic stenosis severity J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 5, 2003; 41(3): 435 - 442. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. A. Levine and E. Schwammenthal Stenosis is in the eye of the observer: impact of pressure recovery on assessing aortic valve area J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 5, 2003; 41(3): 443 - 445. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Gilon, E. G. Cape, M. D. Handschumacher, J.-K. Song, J. Solheim, M. VanAuker, M. E. E. King, and R. A. Levine Effect of three-dimensional valve shape on the hemodynamics of aortic stenosis: Three-dimensional echocardiographic stereolithography and patient studies J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 16, 2002; 40(8): 1479 - 1486. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
O. Bech-Hanssen, K. Caidahl, I. Wallentin, P. Ask, and B. Wranne Assessment of effective orifice area of prosthetic aortic valves with Doppler echocardiography: An in vivo and in vitro study J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., August 1, 2001; 122(2): 287 - 295. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. S. Firstenberg, P. M. Vandervoort, N. L. Greenberg, N. G. Smedira, P. M. McCarthy, M. J. Garcia, and J. D. Thomas Noninvasive estimation of transmitral pressure drop across the normal mitral valve in humans: importance of convective and inertial forces during left ventricular filling J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 15, 2000; 36(6): 1942 - 1949. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Pibarot and J. G. Dumesnil Hemodynamic and clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch in the aortic valve position and its prevention J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 1, 2000; 36(4): 1131 - 1141. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Shandas, J. Kwon, and L. Valdes-Cruz A Method for Determining the Reference Effective Flow Areas for Mechanical Heart Valve Prostheses : In Vitro Validation Studies Circulation, April 25, 2000; 101(16): 1953 - 1959. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Y. Leung, J. Wong, L. Rodriguez, M. Pu, P. M. Vandervoort, and J. D. Thomas Application of Color Doppler Flow Mapping to Calculate Orifice Area of St Jude Mitral Valve Circulation, September 22, 1998; 98(12): 1205 - 1211. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. H. Marcus, R. S. Heinrich, J. Bednarz, S. Lupovitch, J. Abruzzo, R. Borok, B. Vandenberg, R. E. Kerber, W. Piccione, A. P. Yoganathan, et al. Assessment of Small-Diameter Aortic Mechanical Prostheses : Physiological Relevance of the Doppler Gradient, Utility of Flow Augmentation, and Limitations of Orifice Area Estimation Circulation, September 1, 1998; 98(9): 866 - 872. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|