Key result
Artificial aortic valves increased turbulence energy compared to normal valves, with mean Velocity Energy Ratio at 100 Hz of 1.4% for SJM and 2.1% for SSB valves versus 0.3% for normal valves.
Why the study?
Does the presence and type of artificial aortic valve affect velocity spectral energy distribution and turbulence in the ascending aorta compared to normal valves?
Observational (n=15)
Does the presence and type of artificial aortic valve affect velocity spectral energy distribution and turbulence in the ascending aorta compared to normal valves?
Artificial aortic valves, particularly Starr-Edwards Silastic Ball valves, generate higher turbulence energy in the ascending aorta compared to normal aortic valves.
Higher turbulence with prosthetic aortic valves may affect ascending aorta flow; cross-sectional data leaves open clinical relevance.
To analyze velocity spectral energy distribution in humans, blood velocities were recorded by means of hot-film anemometry at 41 predetermined measurement points in the cross-sectional area of the ascending aorta approximately 6 cm downstream of the aortic valves. Measurements were made in 8 patients with normal aortic valves, in 4 after insertion of a St. Jude Medical (SJM) aortic valve and in 3 after insertion of a Starr-Edwards Silastic Ball (SSB) aortic valve. Data analysis based on Fast Fourier Transform demonstrated that turbulence energy was lower in patients with normal aortic valves than in patients after insertion of an artificial valve in the aortic position and probably more pronounced after SSB valves than after SJM valves. The spatial distribution of the turbulence energy above 100 Hz was more irregular than corresponding laminar velocities previously presented. The Ver 100 (Velocity Energy Ratio at 100 Hz, i.e. the velocity energy above 100 Hz divided by the total velocity energy) proved useful for evaluating differences in flow disturbances downstream of different aortic valves. The mean VER 100 in the three categories of patients were respectively 0.3, 1.4, and 2.1%.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paulsen et al. (1988) conducted an observational in Aortic valve replacement (n=15). Artificial aortic valves (SJM or SSB) vs. Normal aortic valves was evaluated on Velocity Energy Ratio at 100 Hz (VER 100). Artificial aortic valves increased turbulence energy compared to normal valves, with mean Velocity Energy Ratio at 100 Hz of 1.4% for SJM and 2.1% for SSB valves versus 0.3% for normal valves.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: