(Circulation. 1996;94:2975-2981.)
© 1996 American Heart Association, Inc.
Articles |
Turbulent/Viscous Interactions Control Doppler/Catheter Pressure Discrepancies in Aortic Stenosis
The Role of the Reynolds Number
the Cardiac Dynamics Laboratory, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh (Pa) (E.G.C., M.D.V.); the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Bethesda, Md (M.J., I.Y.); and the Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Children's Hospital, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver (L.M.V.-C.).
Correspondence to Edward G. Cape, PhD, Division of Cardiology, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, 3705 Fifth Ave, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.
Background Despite good correlation between Doppler and catheter pressure drops in numerous reports, it is well known that Doppler tends to apparently overestimate pressure drops obtained by cardiac catheterization. Neither (1) simplification of the Bernoulli equation nor (2) pressure recovery effects can explain this dilemma when taken alone. This study addressed the hypothesis that a Reynolds number–based approach, which characterizes (1) and (2), provides a first step toward better agreement of catheter and Doppler assessments of pressure drops.
Methods and Results Doppler and catheter pressure drops were studied in an in vitro model designed to isolate the proposed Reynolds number effect and in a sheep model with varying degrees of stenosis. Doppler pressure drops in vitro correlated with the directly measured pressure drop for individual valves (r=.935, .960, .985, .984, .989, and .975) but with markedly different slopes and intercepts. A Bland-Altman type plot showed no useful pattern of discrepancy. The Reynolds number was successful in collapsing the data into the profile proposed in the hypothesis. Parallel results were found in the animal model.
Conclusions Apparent overestimation of net pressure drop by Doppler is due to pressure recovery effects, and these effects are countered by both viscous effects and inertial/turbulent effects. Only by reconciliation of discrepancies by use of a quantity such as Reynolds number that embodies the relative importance of competing factors can the noninvasive and invasive methods be connected. This study shows that a Reynolds number–based approach accomplishes this goal both in the idealized in vitro setting and in a biological system.
Key Words: blood flow • echocardiography • stenosis • pressure • valves
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  A. Giardini and T. A. Tacy Non-invasive estimation of pressure gradients in regurgitant jets: an overdue consideration Eur J Echocardiogr, September 1, 2008; 9(5): 578 - 584. [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]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Schulz-Menger, O. Strohm, J. Waigand, F. Uhlich, R. Dietz, and M. G. Friedrich The Value of Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Left Ventricular Outflow Tract in Patients With Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy After Septal Artery Embolization Circulation, April 18, 2000; 101(15): 1764 - 1766. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Gutberlet, T. Boeckel, N. Hosten, M. Vogel, T. Kühne, H. Oellinger, T. Ehrenstein, S. Venz, R. Hetzer, G. Bein, et al. Arterial Switch Procedure for D-Transposition of the Great Arteries: Quantitative Midterm Evaluation of Hemodynamic Changes with Cine MR Imaging and Phase-Shift Velocity Mapping-Initial Experience Radiology, February 1, 2000; 214(2): 467 - 475. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. G. DeGroff, R. Shandas, and L. Valdes-Cruz Pressure recovery and aortic stenosis J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 1, 2000; 35(1): 260 - 260. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Isaaz The ratio of post-valvular aorta to valvular orifice cross-sectional areas: a new haemodynamic index of clinical importance in patients with aortic stenosis? Eur. Heart J., September 2, 1999; 20(18): 1294 - 1296. [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W.A. Schobel, W. Voelker, K.K. Haase, and K.-R. Karsch Extent, determinants and clinical importance of pressure recovery in patients with aortic valve stenosis Eur. Heart J., September 2, 1999; 20(18): 1355 - 1363. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. P. Murgo Systolic ejection murmurs in the era of modern cardiology: What do we really know? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 15, 1998; 32(6): 1596 - 1602. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. G. DeGroff, R. Shandas, and L. Valdes-Cruz Analysis of the Effect of Flow Rate on the Doppler Continuity Equation for Stenotic Orifice Area Calculations : A Numerical Study Circulation, April 28, 1998; 97(16): 1597 - 1605. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|