Key result
TRIFLO and On-X mechanical valves reduce peak TKE up to ~66% versus Perimount biological valves.
Why the study?
Prosthetic heart valve hemodynamics are difficult to compare across studies due to variable test conditions and experimental techniques, and existing evaluations are often limited to single valve families or 5 l/min testing without sufficient spatial resolution.
How do the hemodynamic performance and turbulence levels compare among a tri-leaflet mechanical, bi-leaflet mechanical, and biological heart valve under varying cardiac output conditions?
How do the hemodynamic performance and turbulence levels compare among a tri-leaflet mechanical, bi-leaflet mechanical, and biological heart valve under varying cardiac output conditions?
In an in vitro model, mechanical valves (TRIFLO and On-X) demonstrated lower peak mean velocities and turbulent kinetic energy compared to the Perimount biological valve across varying cardiac outputs.
In vitro hemodynamic data remain hypothesis-generating; prospective clinical validation needed before guiding valve selection at varying outputs.
The hemodynamic performance of different prosthetic heart valves is difficult to compare among studies due to a variety of test conditions and experimental techniques. Existing studies are typically limited to one family of valves (biological or mechanical) and testing conditions of 5l/min and often lack sufficient spatial resolution. To address these limitations, a pulse duplicator with a multi-view imaging system (Tomo-PIV) was employed to investigate the three-dimensional flow field in the aortic root of three different valves: a tri-leaflet mechanical heart valve (TRIFLO, Novostia), a bi-leaflet mechanical heart valve (On-X, Artivion), and a biological heart valve (Perimount, Edwards Lifesciences). The valves were tested at low (3 l/min), normal (5 l/min), and elevated (7 l/min) cardiac output $$(CO)$$ ( C O ) under hypotensive (40/60mmHg), normotensive (80/120mmHg), and moderate hypertensive (105/170mmHg) pressure conditions, respectively. Compared to the Perimount, peak mean velocity was − 33%, − 24%, − 18% for the TRIFLO and − 32%, − 20%, − 11% for the On-X at low, moderate, and elevated $$CO$$ CO , respectively. Corresponding peak $$TKE$$ TKE values decreased by − 66%, − 57%, − 44% (TRIFLO) and − 60%, − 50%, − 36% (On-X). At low $$CO$$ CO , $$EOA$$ EOA was lower for Perimount (1.07cm 2 ) than for TRIFLO (1.47cm 2 ) and On-X (1.52cm 2 ), while it increased for elevated $$CO$$ CO to 2.75cm 2 (TRIFLO) and 2.16cm 2 (Perimount and On-X). For all valves, increasing $$CO$$ CO led to increased flow velocities, higher $$EOA,$$ E O A , and higher levels of turbulence, and the spatial influence of the valve on the flow field in the ascending aorta was extended. $$TKE$$ TKE peaked closer to the STJ than for TRIFLO and Perimount.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ferrari et al. (2024) studied Aortic valve replacement (in vitro model). Prosthetic heart valves (TRIFLO, On-X, Perimount) vs. Comparison among the three valves was evaluated on Hemodynamic performance (peak mean velocity and turbulent kinetic energy). Compared to the Perimount biological valve, the TRIFLO and On-X mechanical valves reduced peak mean velocity by up to 33% and 32%, and decreased peak turbulent kinetic energy by up to 66% and 60%, respectively.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: