Why the study?
Mitral valve regurgitation is highly prevalent and its quantitative assessment is challenging but crucial for treatment decisions.
Can a reduced order model based on orifice shape accurately estimate mitral regurgitation flow rates compared to computational fluid dynamics?
Can a reduced order model based on orifice shape accurately estimate mitral regurgitation flow rates compared to computational fluid dynamics?
A novel reduced order model based on orifice shape provides accurate, computationally efficient estimates of mitral regurgitation flow rates comparable to complex computational fluid dynamics.
May support efficient MR quantification clinically; leaves open prospective outcome validation before adoption.
Mitral valve regurgitation (MR) is one of the most prevalent valvular heart diseases. Its quantitative assessment is challenging but crucial for treatment decisions. Using computational fluid dynamics (CFD), we developed a reduced order model (ROM) describing the relationship between MR flow rates, transvalvular pressure differences, and the size and shape of the regurgitant valve orifice. Due to its low computational cost, this ROM could easily be implemented into clinical workflows to support the assessment of MR. We reconstructed mitral valves of 43 patients from 3D transesophageal echocardiographic images and estimated the 3D anatomic regurgitant orifice areas using a shrink-wrap algorithm. The orifice shapes were quantified with three dimensionless shape parameters. Steady-state CFD simulations in the reconstructed mitral valves were performed to analyse the relationship between the regurgitant orifice geometry and the regurgitant hemodynamics. Based on the results, three ROMs with increasing complexity were defined, all of which revealed very good agreement with CFD results with a mean bias below 3% for the MR flow rate. Classifying orifices into two shape groups and assigning group-specific flow coefficients in the ROM reduced the limit of agreement predicting regurgitant volumes from 9.0 ml to 5.7 ml at a mean regurgitant volume of 57 ml.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Franz et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: