Why the study?
Do the continuity equation and Gorlin formula accurately estimate directly observed orifice area in native and prosthetic aortic valves?
Population
8 prepared native aortic valves and 4 bioprostheses tested in a computer-controlled ventricular flow simulator
Comparison
Estimation of orifice area using the continuity… vs Maximal orifice area measured directly by…
Design
Preclinical
Key result
The continuity equation accurately estimated aortic valve orifice area (mean difference 0), whereas the conventional Gorlin formula overestimated area (mean difference -0.14 cm2).
Authors
Loading...
Animal data favor continuity equation over Gorlin for orifice area; leaves open translation to human native and prosthetic valves.
Do the continuity equation and Gorlin formula accurately estimate directly observed orifice area in native and prosthetic aortic valves?
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs -0.14%
Estimates of aortic valve orifice area by continuity or Gorlin equations should be considered a guide rather than a precise measure of actual orifice area.
Chambers et al. (1992) studied Aortic valve orifice area measurement (n=12). Continuity equation vs. Gorlin formula was evaluated on Mean difference between measured and estimated orifice area (cm2). The continuity equation accurately estimated aortic valve orifice area (mean difference 0), whereas the conventional Gorlin formula overestimated area (mean difference -0.14 cm2).