Assessment of prosthetic aortic valve performance by magnetic resonance velocity imaging
Why the study?
Does an aortic mechanical valve prosthesis alter ascending aorta flow profiles compared to normal native valves?
Population
13 subjects: 7 patients with an aortic valve prosthesis and 6 healthy volunteers.
Comparison
Aortic (mechanical) valve prosthesis vs Native aortic valve (healthy volunteers)
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Higher prosthetic velocities observed cross-sectionally should not change practice; leaves open outcome associations and need for longitudinal studies.
Structured PICO
Does an aortic mechanical valve prosthesis alter ascending aorta flow profiles compared to normal native valves?
P
Population
13 subjects: 7 patients with an aortic (mechanical) valve prosthesis (replacement within the last 2 years) and 6 healthy volunteers.
I
Intervention
Aortic (mechanical) valve prosthesis
C
Comparator
Native aortic valve (healthy volunteers)
O
Outcome
Flow profiles of the ascending aorta (peak flow, mean flow, mean reverse flow, systolic reverse flow, end-systolic closing, and diastolic leakage volume) measured by ECG triggered phase contrast MRIsurrogate
Mechanical aortic valve prostheses significantly alter ascending aortic flow profiles, increasing peak flow velocity, closing volume, and diastolic leakage compared to native valves as measured by MRI velocity mapping.
Cite This Study
Botnar et al. (2000) studied this question.