Key result
In vitro assessment of surgical and transcatheter aortic valves revealed that downstream flow characteristics and turbulence differed significantly depending on valve type, design, and size (P<.0001).
Why the study?
The study was conducted to characterize the flow dynamics of surgical and transcatheter aortic valves in vitro, assessing differences in flow turbulence, blood damage likelihood, and hemodynamic performance across valve types.
How do flow dynamics and hemodynamic parameters differ among various surgical and transcatheter aortic valves in an in vitro model?
How do flow dynamics and hemodynamic parameters differ among various surgical and transcatheter aortic valves in an in vitro model?
p-value: p=<.0001
In vitro flow dynamic analysis reveals significant differences in downstream turbulence and shear stress among various surgical and transcatheter aortic valves, emphasizing the importance of optimizing downstream flow properties in future designs.
In vitro comparisons reveal persistent turbulence variations across valve designs; leaves open whether downstream flow optimization improves clinical outcomes.
Objective: To perform an in vitro characterization of surgical aortic valves (SAVs) and transcatheter aortic valves (TAVs) to highlight the development of the flow dynamics depending on the type of valve implanted and assess the basic differences in the light of flow turbulence and its effect on blood damage likelihood and hemodynamic parameters that shed light on valve performance. Methods: A Starr-Edwards ball and cage valve of internal diameter 22 mm, a 23-mm Medtronic Hancock II SAV, a 23-mm St Jude Trifecta SAV, a 23-mm St Jude SJM (mechanical valve) SAV, a 26-mm Medtronic Evolut TAV, and a 26-mm Edwards SAPIEN 3 TAV were assessed in a pulse duplicator under physiological conditions. Particle image velocimetry was performed for each valve. Pressure gradient and effective orifice area (EOA) along with velocity flow field, Reynolds shear stress (RSS), and viscous shear stress (VSS) were calculated. Results: < .0001). The flow characteristics and behavior downstream of the valves differed depending on the valve type, design, and size. The greater the RSS and VSS the more turbulent the downstream flow. Hancock II displays the greatest range of RSS and VSS magnitudes compared with the same-size Trifecta and SJM. The Evolut displays the greatest range of RSS and VSS compared with the SAPIEN 3. Conclusions: The results of this study shed light on numerous advancements in the design of aortic valve replacement prosthesis and the subsequent hemodynamic variations. Future surgical and transcatheter valve designs should aim at not only concentrating on hemodynamic parameters but also at optimizing downstream flow properties.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hatoum et al. (2022) studied this question. Surgical and transcatheter aortic valves vs. Various valve designs was evaluated on Pressure gradient, effective orifice area, velocity flow field, Reynolds shear stress, and viscous shear stress (p=<.0001). In vitro assessment of surgical and transcatheter aortic valves revealed that downstream flow characteristics and turbulence differed significantly depending on valve type, design, and size (P<.0001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: