Determination of aortic valve area by two-dimensional and Doppler echocardiography in patients with normal and stenotic bioprosthetic valves

The diagnostic role of "acceleration time" measurement in patients with classical low flow low gradient aortic stenosis with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction

PURPOSE

In our study, we aimed to assess the role of acceleration time (AT), ejection time (ET), and AT/ET ratio to distinguish between true and pseudo severe AS in patients with classical low flow-low gradient (LF-LG) aortic stenosis (AS) with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

METHODS

Sixty-seven classical LF-LG AS with reduced LVEF patients who underwent dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) were included in the study. According to DSE results, all patients were divided into two groups; true AS and pseudo severe AS. Aortic valve calcium score was measured in patients with inconclusive DSE results. AT and other ejection dynamics (ET and AT/ET) were calculated by taking baseline echocardiographic records into account for all patients. The predictive power of AT and other ejection dynamics were evaluated to estimate true and pseudo severe AS.

RESULTS

According to DSE results, out of 67 patients, 44 (65.7%) was diagnosed as true severe AS. There was a statistically significant relation between baseline AT and true AS [adjusted OR 4.47 (95% CI 1.93-10.4), p = 0.001]. The best cutoff value of AT was measured as 100 msec according to the Youden index. This value had a sensitivity value of 77%, specificity value of 87%, positive predictive value of 92%, and a negative predictive value of 67%.

CONCLUSION

The measurement of AT can predict the DSE outcome and can be used for diagnostic purposes to distinguish between true and pseudo severe AS in classical LF-LG AS patients with reduced LVEF.

The ratio of measured and reference effective orifice areas for discriminating prosthetic aortic valve obstruction

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the measured effective orifice area (EOA)/reference EOA ratio in discriminating mechanical prosthetic aortic valve (PAV) obstruction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This is a retrospective study of 193 mechanical PAV patients with an elevated mean transprosthetic pressure gradient (PG) over 20 mmHg or peak velocity over 3 m/s. Of those, 143 patients were objectively proven PAV obstruction with cardiac computed tomography or surgical inspection. The EOA was measured using the continuity equation, and the reference EOA values were obtained from previous guidelines. The measured/reference EOA ratio was significantly lower in the obstruction group (0.63 ± 0.18 vs. 0.86 ± 0.17; P < 0.001). The EOA ratio added incremental value for discriminating obstruction from the conventional parameters recommended in the guidelines. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the measured/reference EOA ratio discriminated PAV obstruction from those without obstruction [area under the curve (AUC), 0.840; 95% confidence interval, 0.783-0.898; P < 0.001]. A cutoff of 0.71 had 73.4% sensitivity and 82.0% specificity. The novel diagnostic algorithm adding the EOA ratio had similar accuracy to previous guideline algorithms, including reference EOA, and conventional Doppler parameters (AUC, 0.763 vs. 0.731; P = 0.309). In patients with a large PAV (≥23 mm), the novel algorithm had higher accuracy than the previous algorithm (AUC, 0.788 vs. 0.642; P = 0.019).

CONCLUSION

The ratio of measured/reference EOA adds incremental value over conventional Doppler parameters and might be helpful for distinguishing PAV obstruction.

Doppler assessment of aortic stenosis: a 25-operator study demonstrating why reading the peak velocity is superior to velocity time integral

Aims

Measurements with superior reproducibility are useful clinically and research purposes. Previous reproducibility studies of Doppler assessment of aortic stenosis (AS) have compared only a pair of observers and have not explored the mechanism by which disagreement between operators occurs. Using custom-designed software which stored operators’ traces, we investigated the reproducibility of peak and velocity time integral (VTI) measurements across a much larger group of operators and explored the mechanisms by which disagreement arose.

Methods and results

Twenty-five observers reviewed continuous wave (CW) aortic valve (AV) and pulsed wave (PW) left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) Doppler traces from 20 sequential cases of AS in random order. Each operator unknowingly measured each peak velocity and VTI twice. VTI tracings were stored for comparison. Measuring the peak is much more reproducible than VTI for both PW (coefficient of variation 10.1 vs. 18.0%; P < 0.001) and CW traces (coefficient of variation 4.0 vs. 10.2%; P < 0.001). VTI is inferior because the steep early and late parts of the envelope are difficult to trace reproducibly. Dimensionless index improves reproducibility because operators tended to consistently over-read or under-read on LVOT and AV traces from the same patient (coefficient of variation 9.3 vs. 17.1%; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

It is far more reproducible to measure the peak of a Doppler trace than the VTI, a strategy that reduces measurement variance by approximately six-fold. Peak measurements are superior to VTI because tracing the steep slopes in the early and late part of the VTI envelope is difficult to achieve reproducibly.

The Integration of Doppler Ultrasound With Two-Dimensional Echocardiography and the Noninvasive Cardiac Hemodynamic Revolution of the 1980s

In the 1970s, as cardiac imaging matured from M-mode to two-dimensional echocardiography, investigators in Norway showed that continuous-wave Doppler ultrasonography could be used to accurately measure the mean gradient and pressure half-time for stenotic mitral valves. In the 1980s, continuous-wave Doppler was validated for measurement of the pressure gradient across stenotic aortic valves, and pulsed-wave Doppler combined with two-dimensional echocardiographic imaging was validated for noninvasive measurement of stroke volume and cardiac output. The combination of stroke volume measurement and measurement of the time-velocity integral of flow through the aortic valve was then validated as a means to accurately calculate valve area for patients with stenotic aortic valves or aortic prostheses. This integration of cardiac Doppler ultrasonography with two-dimensional echocardiographic cardiac imaging led to a revolution in noninvasive hemodynamic evaluations, which have replaced invasive hemodynamic evaluations in surgical decision making for most patients with native or prosthetic valvular stenosis.

Echocardiographic follow-up after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

The use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis has rapidly increased during the past years. Accordingly, more and more patients are referred for a follow-up echocardiographic study after TAVR. However, the echocardiographic evaluation of patients who underwent TAVR places specific demands on echocardiographers. Furthermore, TAVR may be associated with new types of complications, which are frequently unrecognized or underestimated due to lack of familiarity with the normal and pathological appearance of TAVR. Therefore, this review summarizes the echocardiographic parameters describing the structural and functional status of bioprostheses used in TAVR, procedures taking into account their peculiar hemodynamics. We also describe the strengths and the limitations of echocardiography and of other imaging modalities in detecting long-term complications of TAVR (eg, infective endocarditis, thrombosis). The aim of this review was to serve as a guide for a structured echocardiographic follow-up of TAVR patients, as well as for the echocardiographic diagnosis of the procedure-associated complications.

Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the current Valvular Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 initiative was to revisit the selection and definitions of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)- clinical endpoints to make them more suitable to the present and future needs of clinical trials. In addition, this document is intended to expand understanding of patient risk stratification and case selection.

BACKGROUND

A recent study confirmed that VARC definitions have already been incorporated into clinical and research practice and represent a new standard for consistency in reporting clinical outcomes of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI. However, as the clinical experience with this technology has matured and expanded, certain definitions have become unsuitable or ambiguous.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Two in-person meetings (held in September 2011 in Washington, DC, USA, and in February 2012 in Rotterdam, The Netherlands) involving VARC study group members, independent experts (including surgeons, interventional and non-interventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, neurologists, geriatric specialists, and clinical trialists), the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives, provided much of the substantive discussion from which this VARC-2 consensus manuscript was derived. This document also provides an overview of risk assessment and patient stratification that needed to be considered for accurate patient inclusion in studies. Working groups were assigned to define the following clinical endpoints: mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, bleeding, acute kidney injury, vascular complications, conduction disturbances & arrhythmias, and a miscellaneous category including relevant complications not previously categorized. Furthermore, comprehensive echocardiographic recommendations are provided for evaluation of prosthetic valve (dys)function. Definitions for quality of life assessments are also reported. These endpoints formed the basis for several recommended composite endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

This VARC-2 document has provided further standardization of endpoint definitions for studies evaluating the use of TAVI, which will lead to improved comparability and interpretability of study results, supplying an increasingly growing body of evidence with respect to transcatheter aortic valve implantation and/or surgical aortic valve replacement. This initiative and document can furthermore be used as a model during current endeavors of applying definitions to other transcatheter valve therapies (for example, mitral valve repair).

Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the current Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 initiative was to revisit the selection and definitions of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)clinical endpoints to make them more suitable to the present and future needs of clinical trials. In addition, this document is intended to expand the understanding of patient risk stratification and case selection.

BACKGROUND

A recent study confirmed that VARC definitions have already been incorporated into clinical and research practice and represent a new standard for consistency in reporting clinical outcomes of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI. However, as the clinical experience with this technology has matured and expanded, certain definitions have become unsuitable or ambiguous.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Two in-person meetings (held in September 2011 in Washington, DC, USA, and in February 2012 in Rotterdam, the Netherlands) involving VARC study group members, independent experts (including surgeons, interventional and non-interventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, neurologists, geriatric specialists, and clinical trialists), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives, provided much of the substantive discussion from which this VARC-2 consensus manuscript was derived. This document provides an overview of risk assessment and patient stratification that need to be considered for accurate patient inclusion in studies. Working groups were assigned to define the following clinical endpoints: mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, bleeding complications, acute kidney injury, vascular complications, conduction disturbances and arrhythmias, and a miscellaneous category including relevant complications not previously categorized. Furthermore, comprehensive echocardiographic recommendations are provided for the evaluation of prosthetic valve (dys)function. Definitions for the quality of life assessments are also reported. These endpoints formed the basis for several recommended composite endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

This VARC-2 document has provided further standardization of endpoint definitions for studies evaluating the use of TAVI, which will lead to improved comparability and interpretability of the study results, supplying an increasingly growing body of evidence with respect to TAVI and/or surgical aortic valve replacement. This initiative and document can furthermore be used as a model during current endeavours of applying definitions to other transcatheter valve therapies (for example, mitral valve repair).

Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the current Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 initiative was to revisit the selection and definitions of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) clinical endpoints to make them more suitable to the present and future needs of clinical trials. In addition, this document is intended to expand the understanding of patient risk stratification and case selection.

BACKGROUND

A recent study confirmed that VARC definitions have already been incorporated into clinical and research practice and represent a new standard for consistency in reporting clinical outcomes of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI. However, as the clinical experience with this technology has matured and expanded, certain definitions have become unsuitable or ambiguous.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Two in-person meetings (held in September 2011 in Washington, DC, USA, and in February 2012 in Rotterdam, the Netherlands) involving VARC study group members, independent experts (including surgeons, interventional and non-interventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, neurologists, geriatric specialists, and clinical trialists), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives, provided much of the substantive discussion from which this VARC-2 consensus manuscript was derived. This document provides an overview of risk assessment and patient stratification that need to be considered for accurate patient inclusion in studies. Working groups were assigned to define the following clinical endpoints: mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, bleeding complications, acute kidney injury, vascular complications, conduction disturbances and arrhythmias, and a miscellaneous category including relevant complications not previously categorized. Furthermore, comprehensive echocardiography recommendations are provided for the evaluation of prosthetic valve (dys)function. Definitions for the quality of life assessments are also reported. These endpoints formed the basis for several recommended composite endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

This VARC-2 document has provided further standardization of endpoint definitions for studies evaluating the use of TAVI, which will lead to improved comparability and interpretability of the study results, supplying an increasingly growing body of evidence with respect to TAVI and/or surgical aortic valve replacement. This initiative and document can furthermore be used as a model during current endeavors of applying definitions to other transcatheter valve therapies (for example, mitral valve repair).

Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the current Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 initiative was to revisit the selection and definitions of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) clinical endpoints to make them more suitable to the present and future needs of clinical trials. In addition, this document is intended to expand the understanding of patient risk stratification and case selection.

BACKGROUND

A recent study confirmed that VARC definitions have already been incorporated into clinical and research practice and represent a new standard for consistency in reporting clinical outcomes of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI. However, as the clinical experience with this technology has matured and expanded, certain definitions have become unsuitable or ambiguous.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Two in-person meetings (held in September 2011 in Washington, DC, and in February 2012 in Rotterdam, The Netherlands) involving VARC study group members, independent experts (including surgeons, interventional and noninterventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, neurologists, geriatric specialists, and clinical trialists), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives, provided much of the substantive discussion from which this VARC-2 consensus manuscript was derived. This document provides an overview of risk assessment and patient stratification that need to be considered for accurate patient inclusion in studies. Working groups were assigned to define the following clinical endpoints: mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, bleeding complications, acute kidney injury, vascular complications, conduction disturbances and arrhythmias, and a miscellaneous category including relevant complications not previously categorized. Furthermore, comprehensive echocardiographic recommendations are provided for the evaluation of prosthetic valve (dys)function. Definitions for the quality of life assessments are also reported. These endpoints formed the basis for several recommended composite endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

This VARC-2 document has provided further standardization of endpoint definitions for studies evaluating the use of TAVI, which will lead to improved comparability and interpretability of the study results, supplying an increasingly growing body of evidence with respect to TAVI and/or surgical aortic valve replacement. This initiative and document can furthermore be used as a model during current endeavors of applying definitions to other transcatheter valve therapies (for example, mitral valve repair).

Flow acceleration time and ratio of acceleration time to ejection time for prosthetic aortic valve function

OBJECTIVES

We sought to evaluate whether ejection dynamics, particularly acceleration time (AT) and the ratio of AT to ejection time (ET), can differentiate prosthetic aortic valve (PAV) stenosis from controls and prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM).

BACKGROUND

Diagnosing PAV stenosis, especially in mechanical valves, may be challenging and has significant clinical implications.

METHODS

Doppler echocardiography was quantitated in 88 patients with PAV (44 mechanical and 44 bioprosthetic; age 63 ± 16 years; valve size range 18 to 25 mm) of whom 22 patients had documented PAV stenosis, 22 had PPM, and 44 served as controls. Quantitative Doppler parameters included ejection dynamics (AT, ET, and AT/ET) and conventional PAV parameters.

RESULTS

Patients with PAV stenosis had significantly lower effective orifice area (EOA) values and higher gradients compared with controls and PPM. Flow ejection parameters (AT and AT/ET) were significantly longer in the stenotic valves compared with PPM and controls (respective values for AT: 120 ± 24 ms, 89 ± 16 ms, and 71 ± 15 ms; for AT/ET: 0.4, 0.32, and 0.3, p ≤ 0.001). Patients with PPM had gradients and ejection dynamics that were intermediate between normal and stenotic valves. Receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed that AT and AT/ET discriminated PAV stenosis from PPM and controls (area under ROC curve = 0.92 and 0.88, respectively). Combining AT with the conventional Doppler velocity index gave the highest area under the curve of 0.98 but was not statistically different from that of AT alone (p = 0.12). A cutoff of AT = 100 ms had a sensitivity and specificity of 86% for identifying PAV stenosis; for an AT/ET = 0.37, the sensitivity and specificity were 96% and 82%, respectively. Analysis by valve type (mechanical and biological) revealed similar results; however, biological valves had slightly higher areas under the curve for all systolic time intervals.

CONCLUSIONS

Ejection dynamics through PAV, particularly AT and AT/ET, are reliable angle-independent parameters that can help evaluate valve function and identify PAV stenosis.

Feasibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance to assess the orifice area of aortic bioprostheses

BACKGROUND

Prosthetic orifice area, usually calculated by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) or transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), provides important information regarding the hemodynamic performance of aortic bioprostheses. However, both TTE and TEE have limitations; therefore accurate and reproducible determination of the orifice area often remains a challenge. The present study aimed to investigate the feasibility of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) to assess the orifice areas of aortic bioprostheses.

METHODS AND RESULTS

CMR planimetry of the orifice area was performed in 65 patients (43/22 stented/stentless prostheses; mean time since implantation, 3.1+/-2.8 years; mean orifice area [TTE], 1.70+/-0.43 cm(2); 62 normally functioning prostheses, 2 severe stenoses, and 1 severe regurgitation) in an imaging plane perpendicular to the transprosthetic flow using steady-state free-precession cine imaging under breath-hold conditions on a 1.5-T MR system. CMR results were compared with TTE (continuity equation, n=65) and TEE (planimetry, n=31). CMR planimetry was readily feasible in 80.0%; feasible with limitation in 15.4% because of stent, flow, and sternal wire artifacts; and impossible in 4.6% because of flow artifacts. Correlations of the orifice areas by CMR with TTE (r=0.82) and CMR with TEE (r=0.92) were significant. The average difference between the methods was -0.02+/-0.24 cm(2) (TTE) and 0.05+/-0.15 cm(2) (TEE). Agreement was present for stented and stentless devices and independent of orifice size. Intraobserver and interobserver variabilities of CMR planimetry were 6.7+/-5.4% and 11.5+/-7.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

The assessment of aortic bioprostheses with normal orifice areas by CMR is technically feasible and provides orifice areas with a close correlation to echocardiography and low observer dependency.

Ejection fraction-velocity ratio for the assessment of aortic bioprosthetic valves in patients with systolic dysfunction

BACKGROUND

The continuity equation (CE) represents the 'gold standard' for the evaluation of aortic valve area in patients with aortic stenosis, but it is time-consuming and subject to error, and can be technically demanding. Recently, a new echocardiographic nonflow corrected index was introduced and demonstrated excellent accuracy in quantifying the effective orifice area (EOA) in native aortic valves and bioprostheses. This new index, the ejection fraction (EF)-velocity ratio (EFVR), is obtained by dividing the percentage left ventricular EF by the maximum aortic gradient.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the usefulness of this echocardiographic index for quantifying the EOA in patients with aortic bioprosthesis and left ventricular dysfunction.

METHODS

A total of 70 patients (25 women and 45 men) with aortic bioprosthesis and left ventricular dysfunction (EF of 49% or less) were studied. The mean (+/- SD) age of the study population was 71.4+/-9 years. The EOA was evaluated, both by the CE and by the EFVR.

RESULTS

A significant linear correlation between the CE and the EFVR was found (r=0.80; P<0.0001). The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed good agreement between the CE and the EFVR. An EFVR value of 1.15 or less was found to have a good sensitivity (89%) and good specificity (91%) in identifying patients with an EOA of 1.0 cm2 or smaller, with positive and negative predictive values of 79% and 95%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The EFVR, a simple index that is less time-consuming than the CE, allows the identification of patients with aortic bioprosthesis stenosis with excellent sensitivity and specificity. It may be taken into consideration in clinical practice for the evaluation of patients with aortic bioprosthesis stenosis and left ventricular dysfunction.

Prosthetic heart valves: Types and echocardiographic evaluation

In the last five decades multiple different models of prosthetic valves have been developed. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive source of information for the types and the echocardiographic evaluation of the prosthetic heart valves.

Clinical and echocardiographic assessment of the Medtronic Advantage aortic valve prosthesis: the Scandinavian multicentre, prospective study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this report is the prospective, multicentre evaluation of clinical results and haemodynamic performance of the Medtronic Advantage aortic valve prosthesis.

METHODS

From April 2001 to June 2003, 166 patients (male:female 125:41; mean (SD) age 61.8 (11.8) years) received an aortic advantage valve prosthesis. Complete cumulative follow-up was 242.7 patient-years (maximum 3.2; mean 1.6 years). Postoperatively, patients underwent early (within 30 days) and 1 year transthoracic echocardiography.

RESULTS

30 day mortality was 2.4% (n = 4). Kaplan-Meier estimates of freedom from complications and linearised rates were as follows: 96.9 (1.6)% survival; 94.7 (1.3)% (2.06 patients/year) thrombo-embolism; 99.4 (0.6)% (0.4 patients/year) bleeding; 98.8 (0.9)% (0.8 patients/year) non-structural valve dysfunction; 98.8 (0.9)% (0.8 patients/year) reoperation. Valvular mean pressure gradients ranged from 16 (3) mm Hg for size 19 to 7 (2) mm Hg for size 27 and the corresponding effective orifice areas ranged from 1.2 (0.25) to 3.2 (0.66) cm(2). In all, left ventricular mass significantly decreased (p<0.001) and fractional shortening increased (p<0.001) from postoperative to 1 year echocardiography.

CONCLUSIONS

Haemodynamic performance and early clinical results of Medtronic advantage in the aortic position were satisfactory and comparable with those of other bileaflet valves in current clinical use.

Use of the Ejection Fraction-Velocity Ratio in the Hemodynamic Assessment of Aortic Bioprosthetic Valves

BACKGROUND

A new echocardiographic severity index of aortic valve stenosis has been recently introduced: the ejection fraction-velocity ratio (EFVR), which is a simple ratio ejection fraction/4Vmax2. This nonflow corrected index demonstrated an excellent accuracy in quantifying the effective orifice area (EOA) in native aortic valves. There is no information about the reliability of EFVR in assessing aortic EOA in patients with bioprostheses.

METHODS

In 141 consecutive patients with aortic bioprostheses (85 males, mean age 74 +/- 9 years), EOA was calculated by both continuity equation (CE) and EFVR.

RESULTS

The correlation between CE and EFVR was highly significant (r = 0.88; P < 0.0001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.97 (considering a positive case CE < 1.0 cm2, best cutoff of EFVR was <1.06). Using CE as gold standard and a cutoff of 1.0 for both indexes, EFVR showed good sensitivity (80%) and specificity (98%). Also in a subgroup of 46 patients with moderate or severe mitral regurgitation, the EFVR had a good diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity 89%, specificity 97%). In 91 patients with ejection fraction < or = 50%, the EFVR confirmed good sensitivity (79%) and specificity (97%).

CONCLUSIONS

The EFVR, a simple and not time-consuming index, demonstrated a good diagnostic accuracy in assessing EOA also in patients with aortic bioprostheses. The presence of moderate to severe mitral regurgitation or left ventricular dysfunction does not reduce significantly the reliability of this new index. The EFVR can be taken into consideration in the clinical practice, at least when CE measurements are technically difficult.

Nominal size in six bileaflet mechanical aortic valves: a comparison of orifice size and biologic equivalence

OBJECTIVES

Nominal size remains the standard by which valves are compared, but its relationship with orifice area and the patient tissue annulus diameter may differ according to valve design. The aims of this study were to measure the orifice size and compare biologic equivalence in six bileaflet mechanical heart valve designs.

METHODS

The inflow aspect of each of 29 valves was photographed then digitized, and the maximum internal diameter and orifice area were calculated. Biologic equivalence was assessed with a series of machined polypropylene blocks.

RESULTS

The orifice area ranged between 159 and 222 mm(2) for the six size 19 valves. The internal diameter ranged from 1.6 to 4.6 mm less than the manufacturer's nominal size. Biologic equivalence assessed from an estimate of tissue annulus diameter with machined blocks ranged from 1.0 and 3.5 mm larger than nominal size for the intra-annular valves. This diameter ranged from 3.5 mm smaller to 1.5 mm larger than nominal size for the supra-annular valves.

CONCLUSION

There are major differences between nominal size and biologic equivalence. This may lead to confusion when attempting to make comparisons between different valve designs with the same nominal size. A clearer sizing nomenclature is required and could be based on in vitro assessment of tissue annulus diameter or an alphanumeric code.

[Prosthetic valve thrombosis: which is the most appropriate initial therapy?]

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

This study aims to investigate what is the best initial therapy for patients with obstructive prosthetic valve thrombosis.

METHODS

Data from 47 patients diagnosed with prosthetic valve thrombosis in two tertiary hospitals during an 8-years period were analyzed.

RESULTS

The involved prostheses were in mitral position in 34 cases (2 biological valves), in aortic position in 12, and in double mitral and aortic position in one. The thrombosis was not obstructive in 12 patients. In the remaining 35 patients, the prosthetic obstruction was treated by heparin (n = 2), thrombolysis (n = 19), or direct surgery (n = 14). There was no mortality in the thrombolytic group, although 6 patients needed surgery before discharge because of an abnormal prosthetic residual gradient (n = 5) or a persisting abnormal disc valve motion (n = 1). Five out of 14 patients of direct surgery died, 2 before the planned operation could be performed. Thus, mortality rate, in an intention to treat analysis, was very favourable to thrombolytic therapy (p = 0.008); and this, despite the higher index of clinical severity (on a scale from 0 to 4) was superior in this group of thrombolyzed patients: 3.3 0.6 vs. 2.1 0.9 in those who underwent surgery; p < 0.0001.

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of mortality rate, thrombolysis is a better alternative than direct surgery to fight against obstructive prosthetic valve thrombosis. Even if the result is suboptimal, it allows the performance of surgery in better clinical conditions and, thus, with minor risk.

Transesophageal echocardiographic evaluation of native aortic valve area: utility of the double-envelope technique

OBJECTIVE

To assess the accuracy of aortic valve area (AVA) calculations using the continuity equation with data obtained from the double envelope (DE) (simultaneously obtained left ventricular outflow tract [V1]) and aortic valve [V2] velocities) during intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE).

DESIGN

Prospective study; measurements were performed on-line.

SETTING

University hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Cardiac and noncardiac surgical patients (n = 75) with recent aortic valve assessment (<3 months) undergoing general anesthesia or endotracheal intubation.

INTERVENTIONS

Intraoperative AVA was measured by the continuity equation using the DE technique (DE/TEE) and by planimetry (PL/TEE). Left ventricular outflow tract diameter was obtained from midesophageal views, whereas subvalvular (V1) and valvular (V2) velocities were obtained simultaneously using continuous-wave Doppler from transgastric views. V1 was also obtained using pulsed-wave Doppler. Measurements were compared with AVA obtained preoperatively by the Gorlin equation during cardiac catheterization (G/CATH) or by transthoracic echocardiography using the traditional continuity equation (C/TTE) (nonsimultaneously obtained V1 and V2).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A DE was obtained in 73 of 75 patients (97%). Four patients had atrial fibrillation at the time of the examination, whereas the rest were in sinus rhythm. PL/TEE was performed in 54 of 71 patients with sinus rhythm (76%). Agreement was good between DE/TEE and G/CATH (mean bias, 0.02 cm(2) [SD, 0.24 cm(2)]), and C/TTE (mean bias, -0.05 cm(2) [SD, 0.16 cm(2)]). Agreement was not as good between PL/TEE and G/CATH (mean bias, -0.07 cm(2) [SD, 0.28 cm(2)]) and C/TTE (mean bias, -0.13 cm(2) [SD, 0.30 cm(2)]). V1 obtained by pulsed-wave Doppler and with DE closely agreed (mean bias, 0.01 m/sec [SD, 0.05 m/sec]).

CONCLUSION

TEE evaluation of native AVA using the DE technique is feasible and in good agreement with that obtained by C/TTE and G/CATH. Compared with DE/TEE, PL/TEE did not agree as well. Use of DE/TEE should simplify the continuity equation and may minimize errors resulting from beat-to-beat variability in stroke volume.

An evaluation of prosthetic aortic valves using transesophageal echocardiography: the double-envelope technique

The conventional continuity equation uses nonsimultaneous measurements of blood flow velocities through the left ventricular outflow tract and across the aortic valve to calculate aortic valve area (AVA). We have noted that both velocities can be simultaneously obtained from continuous wave (CW) Doppler analysis (double-envelope [DE]). We hypothesize that prosthetic AVA can be calculated by using the DE technique, during transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). Prosthetic AVA was calculated in 41 of 45 patients immediately after aortic valve replacement by using the DE/AVA technique. Left ventricular outflow tract diameter was obtained from an esophageal view, while subvalvular (V(1)) and valvular (V(2)) peak velocities were simultaneously obtained from transgastric views by using CW Doppler. Prosthetic AVA and V(1)/V(2) ratio (Doppler velocity index) were calculated. V(1) was also measured by using pulse wave Doppler, as is conventionally done. Twenty-three Carbomedic (CM) and 18 Carpentier-Edwards (CE) AVA were evaluated. DE/AVAs for CM and CE valves correlated and agreed with that reported by the manufacturer (CM r(2) = 0.91, mean bias -0.25 cm(2) [SD 0.18]; CE r(2) = 0.73, mean bias -0.02 cm(2) [SD 0.27]). Calculated Doppler velocity index values agree with available data (mean bias 0.03 [SD 0.05]). The V(1) obtained by using the DE method was nearly identical to the V(1) obtained by using pulse wave (r(2) = 0.95, mean bias 0.02 m/s [SD 0.04 m/s]). TEE assessment of prosthetic AVA using the DE technique agrees with data reported by the manufacturer. Obtaining subvalvular and valvular velocities from the same CW Doppler trace may simplify the continuity equation and help avoid errors caused by beat-to-beat changes in blood flow. Quantitative prosthetic aortic valve assessment can be performed, on-line, with TEE by using the DE technique.

IMPLICATIONS

Quantitative assessment of prosthetic aortic valve area can be performed on-line by using transesophageal echocardiography using the double envelope technique.

Regression of hypertrophy after Carpentier-Edwards pericardial aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine whether significant regression of left ventricular hypertrophy is seen after implantation of small sizes (19 to 23 mm) of the Carpentier-Edwards (CE) pericardial valve, a stented pericardial valve.

METHODS

Echocardiograms and electrocardiograms (ECGs) were performed at least 1 year after surgery (mean 18 months) in patients with 19-, 21-, and 23-mm CE pericardial aortic valves and compared with preoperative echocardiograms and ECGs.

RESULTS

A total of 41 patients, mean age 79 +/- 9 years (range 46 to 93 years), were studied, including 7 19-mm, 22 21-mm, and 12 23-mm patients. The mean postoperative gradient was 22 +/- 7 mm Hg for 19-mm valves, 18 +/- 5 mm Hg for 21-mm valves, and 16 +/- 4 mm Hg for 23-mm valves. The postoperative valve areas were 1.1 +/- 0.3 cm2 for the 19-mm, 1.3 +/- 0.3 cm2 for the 21-mm, and 1.5 +/- 0.4 cm2 for the 23-mm valves. Left ventricular end diastolic diameter, end systolic diameter, septal thickness, and posterior wall thickness all decreased significantly (p <0.05) postoperatively. The proportion of patients with significant left ventricular hypertrophy on ECG decreased from 63% to 47% (p = 0.001). Left ventricular mass decreased significantly by echocardiography from 265 g preoperatively to 208 g postoperatively (p = 0.004). Left ventricular mass decreased for each valve size, and the greatest absolute reduction in mass occurred in the 19-mm valve recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

Implantation of the 19-, 21-, and 23-mm CE pericardial valves results in significant reductions in left ventricular mass. These findings suggest that stented pericardial valves can be used in the small aortic root without the need for aortic root enlargement procedures.

Application of color Doppler flow mapping to calculate orifice area of St Jude mitral valve

BACKGROUND

The effective orifice area (EOA) of a prosthetic valve is superior to transvalvular gradients as a measure of valve function, but measurement of mitral prosthesis EOA has not been reliable.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In vitro flow across St Jude valves was calculated by hemispheric proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) and segment-of-spheroid (SOS) methods. For steady and pulsatile conditions, PISA and SOS flows correlated with true flow, but SOS and not PISA underestimated flow. These principles were then used intraoperatively to calculate cardiac output and EOA of newly implanted St Jude mitral valves in 36 patients. Cardiac output by PISA agreed closely with thermodilution (r=0.91, Delta=-0.05+/-0.55 L/min), but SOS underestimated it (r=0.82, Delta=-1.33+/-0.73 L/min). Doppler EOAs correlated with Gorlin equation estimates (r=0.75 for PISA and r=0.68 for SOS, P<0.001) but were smaller than corresponding in vitro EOA estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Proximal flow convergence methods can calculate forward flow and estimate EOA of St Jude mitral valves, which may improve noninvasive assessment of prosthetic mitral valve obstruction.

Evaluation of prosthetic valve function and associated complications

Significant advances in imaging modalities have occurred to evaluate prosthetic valve function and associated complications. These developments involve predominantly the introduction of Doppler technology for the non-invasive determination of gradients and valve areas and TEE for an improved assessment of valve structure, function, and associated complications. The current role of cinefluoroscopy is mostly to complement TEE in the evaluation of motion of mechanical prosthetic valves in the aortic position. Cardiac catheterization is now rarely needed to assess valve function. Diagnosis of prosthetic valve obstruction can be performed in the majority of cases with transthoracic Doppler echocardiography. Differentiation of valve obstruction from normal valve function in small valves with high flow conditions, however, may be difficult. Because of this and the variability in normal valves among different prostheses, knowledge of the type and size of the implanted valve is essential. Patients and ultrasound laboratories are encouraged to seek and provide this information on a routine basis. Although transthoracic echocardiography is the main diagnostic modality for the serial evaluation of prosthetic valve function, it is important to recognize its limitations in assessing prosthetic mitral regurgitation and evaluating structural abnormalities of prosthetic valves. These are the situations in which TEE has the most impact. A summary of general indications of TEE in prosthetic valves is provided in Table 6. Finally, a baseline transthoracic Doppler study is essential in the overall follow-up and serial evaluation of valve function. For future comparisons, the best indices of valve functions are those obtained for patients as their own control, from a baseline Doppler echocardiographic study performed early after the operation.

Hemodynamic Comparison by Doppler Echocardiography of Valves in the Aortic Position: Value of the Continuity Equation to Assess Prosthetic Dysfunction

In 281 patients, we used Doppler echocardiography to compare the hemodynamic performance of different aortic prosthetic valves at three postoperative stages and investigated the value of the continuity equation in diagnosing aortic prosthetic obstruction. A baseline study was performed in 163 patients, a 5 +/- 2-month follow-up study was performed in 103 patients, and a 15 +/- 5-month follow-up study was performed in 65 patients. From baseline to the second study, left ventricular diastolic diameter, heart rate, and maximum (MG) and mean Doppler-derived gradient (MeG) decreased significantly, and left ventricular shortening fraction, systolic blood pressure, stroke volume, and prosthetic valvular area (PVA) increased significantly. No changes were found between the second and third studies. Thus, noninvasive hemodynamic values at the time of follow-up are reported in 171 patients: 86 with Björk-Shiley Monostrut, 27 with Carbomedics, 11 with Medtronic-Hall, 18 with Hancock modified, and 29 with Toronto valve bioprosthesis. Patients implanted with the Toronto had a larger prosthetic size (Monostrut 23 +/- 2 mm, Carbomedics 23 +/- 3 mm, Medtronic-Hall 23 +/- 2 mm, Hancock 23 +/- 2 mm, Toronto 25 +/- 2 mm, P < 0.01) despite a similar body surface area. MeG and MG were lower (MeG [in mmHg] Monostrut 12 +/- 5, Carbomedics 14 +/- 6, Medtronic-Hall 19 +/- 6, Hancock 11 +/- 4, Toronto 7 +/- 5; P < 0.01 between Toronto and all others), and PVA was greater (Monostrut 2.0 +/- 0.7 cm(2), Carbomedics 1.8 +/- 0.8 cm(2), Medtronic-Hall 1.6 +/- 0.7 cm(2), Hancock 1.7 +/- 0.5 cm(2), Toronto 2.2 +/- 0.9 cm(2); P < 0.01 between Toronto and Carbomedics, Medtronic-Hall, and Hancock), even compared with the same sizes in the other valves. A PVA of 0.9 cm(2) or less and MeG of 28 mmHg or more identified prosthetic obstruction with 100% sensitivity and 99% specificity. Hemodynamics change significantly from the early to the late postoperative state. The Toronto valve stentless porcine bioprostheses performs hemodynamically better than other valves. PVA measurement using the continuity equation may accurately identify prosthetic obstruction.

Reference Doppler echocardiographic values for St. Jude Medical, Omnicarbon, and Biocor prosthetic valves in the aortic position

The objectives of the present investigation were (1) to describe Doppler echocardiographic findings for mechanical and biologic aortic valves at an early stage after operation and later in a stable phase and (2) to study the changes occurring between these investigations. Patients (n = 213) who received a mechanical (St. Jude Medical, Omnicarbon) or a biologic (Biocor) valve were studied by Doppler echocardiography within the first week (baseline, n = 203) and after 2 years (late, n = 172). The comparison of baseline with late investigation (mean +/- SD) showed an increase in systolic blood pressure (137 +/- 18.5 to 154 +/- 20.6 mm Hg, p = 0.0001, n = 112), reduction of heart rate (85 +/- 15.3 to 74 +/- 12.0 beats/min, p = 0.0001, n = 141) and increase in stroke volume (59 +/- 20.6 to 77 +/- 19.8 ml, p = 0.0001, n = 132). Prosthetic Doppler echocardiographic findings demonstrated a reduction in blood flow velocity in the left ventricular outflow tract (VLVOT, 1.10 +/- 0.25 to 0.96 +/- 0.23 m/sec, p = 0.0001, n = 146) reduction in peak velocity (Vmax 2.72 +/- 0.53 to 2.59 +/- 0.54 m/sec, p = 0.02, n = 150), reduction in mean pressure gradient (deltaPmean, 18.4 +/- 7.2 to 16.3 +/- 7.3 mm Hg, p = 0.004) and an increase in velocity index (Vmax/VLVOT, 2.56 +/- 0.62 to 2.67 +/- 0.60, p = 0.003, n = 144). The standard deviations of difference between baseline and late investigation expressed as percentage of mean were 25% for VLVOT, 20% for Vmax, 44% for deltaPmean, and 25% for velocity index. In conclusion, this large reference base provides data that should be useful for the clinician evaluating patients with prosthetic valves early after valve replacement as well as at a later stage. When valve dysfunction is suspected a previous investigation for comparison is helpful, and our data describe the changes that normally may be seen between an early baseline and a late investigation.

Hemodynamic performance of the 21-mm St. Jude BioImplant prosthesis using dobutamine Doppler echocardiography

This study examines the hemodynamic performance of small size St. Jude BioImplant aortic prostheses using dobutamine echocardiography. Eleven patients (3 women, mean age 75 years) who had undergone aortic valve replacement with a size 21-mm St. Jude BioImplant aortic prostheses at 10.8 +/- 5.1 months (SD) previously were studied. Dobutamine infusion was started at a rate of 5 microg/kg/min and increased to 10 microg/kg/min, and subsequently to 20 microg/kg/min at 15-minute intervals. Pulsed and continuous-wave Doppler studies were performed at rest and at the end of each stage. Effective orifice area, mean gradient, and the performance index across each prosthesis were calculated and cardiac output was determined by Doppler measurement of flow in the left ventricular outflow tract. Stress dobutamine increased heart rate and cardiac output by 51% and 56%, respectively (both p <0.0001), and the mean transvalvular gradient increased from 30.1 +/- 7.5 mm Hg at rest to 49.3 +/- 11.5 mm Hg at maximum stress (p <0.0005). The performance index increased progressively from 0.29 +/- 0.05 at rest to 0.40 +/- 0.10 at maximum stress (p <0.0005). Regression modeling analyses demonstrated that the maximum stress gradient was independent of all variables except the resting gradient (p = 0.03). Body surface area had no effect on the changes in cardiac output, effective orifice area, or transprosthetic gradient at maximum stress. Thus, these data demonstrate that the size 21-mm St. Jude BioImplant prosthesis exhibits suboptimal hemodynamic performance with transvalvular gradients consistent with mild to moderate aortic stenosis, both at rest and under stress conditions.

Application of the continuity equation and valve resistance to the evaluation of St. Jude Medical prosthetic aortic valve dysfunction

Doppler echocardiography was applied to the assessment of patients with surgically documented St. Jude medical aortic valve dysfunction. Derivation of effective orifice area and Doppler velocity index with the continuity equation and calculation of valve resistance accurately differentiated stenotic from regurgitant and normal valves.

Hemodynamic performance of small aortic valve bioprostheses: is there a difference?

BACKGROUND

There is the potential for left ventricular outflow obstruction when small aortic valve bioprostheses are employed in normal-sized or large adults. It has been hoped that bovine pericardial valves would improve hemodynamic performance in the smaller tissue valve sizes.

METHODS

To determine in vivo hemodynamic performance of heterograft aortic valve prostheses, we analyzed echocardiographic data from patients receiving 21- or 23-mm Carpentier-Edwards pericardial, Medtronic Intact, and Carpentier-Edwards porcine bioprostheses. In addition, data from 19-mm Carpentier-Edwards pericardial valves were included for comparison of hemodynamic performance between valve sizes. Doppler echocardiography was performed in 151 patients within 2 weeks of operation. Left ventricular outflow gradient was derived from continuous Doppler measurements of flow velocity, and effective orifice area was calculated by the continuity equation.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant differences in hemodynamic performance of different sized prostheses for each valve type (effective orifice area, p < 0.01; valvular gradient, p < 0.03). There were, however, no significant differences in effective orifice area or mean gradient for different valve types within each size category.

CONCLUSIONS

The in vivo hemodynamic performance of these three different aortic valve heterograft bioprostheses is similar. Patient-prosthesis mismatch with heterograft prostheses, as demonstrated by the indexed effective orifice area can be avoided by appropriate sizing and use of annular enlarging techniques when necessary.

Echocardiography and Doppler assessment of prosthetic heart valves with transesophageal echocardiography

This article examines the use of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) in the assessment of prosthetic heart valves. A summary of the commonly used artificial valves and their physiologic regurgitant flow patterns, as identified by color Doppler imaging, is presented. The hemodynamic evaluation of prosthetic valve stenosis using Doppler techniques is reviewed, and the diagnostic utility of TEE in identifying the complications of cardiac prostheses is discussed.

Echocardiographic assessment of aortic valve replacement with stentless porcine xenografts

Stentless porcine xenografts (SPXs) implanted in the aortic position have potential hemodynamic advantages over traditional valve prostheses because of the lack of a rigid stent. Twenty-four patients (mean age 59 years) who underwent aortic valve replacement with SPXs were studied by echocardiography early after and 26 +/- 10 months (range 8 to 40) after operation. Peak and mean gradients, as well as aortic valve area, did not change significantly from baseline (16.3 +/- 8 and 9.8 +/- 5.6 mm Hg, and 1.78 +/- 0.63 cm2, respectively) to follow-up study (12.5 +/- 5 and 7.7 +/- 3 mm Hg, and 1.8 +/- 0.65 cm2, respectively). At baseline, color flow Doppler imaging showed aortic valve regurgitation where the leaflets coapted centrally in 17 of 24 patients (trivial, n = 14; mild, n = 3). Besides the central leak, paravalvular regurgitation was seen in 4 patients (trivial, n = 3; mild, n = 1). At follow-up, 18 of 24 patients had aortic valve regurgitation (trivial, n = 11; mild, n = 6; and moderate, n = 1). New valvular regurgitation (graded as trivial, n = 2; mild, n = 2; and moderate, n = 1) was detected in 5 patients, and new paravalvular regurgitation (graded as mild) developed in 1 patient. Two patients underwent repeat operation for valve-related complications: (1) rupture of a valve cusp with acute pulmonary edema, and (2) fibrotic stenosis of the left coronary ostium with unstable angina. In conclusion, this study demonstrates good hemodynamic performance of the SPX in the aortic position.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Substitution of left ventricular outflow tract diameter with prosthesis size is inadequate for calculation of the aortic prosthetic valve area by the continuity equation

It remains uncertain whether prosthetic ring size should be used interchangeably with measured left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) diameter in the continuity equation to estimate the aortic prosthetic valve area by transthoracic Doppler echocardiography. To determine the difference in area caused by this substitution, the area of the prosthetic valve was calculated in 143 patients with aortic bioprostheses by use of the standard continuity equation with the measured LVOT diameter (LVOT method) and then with the bioprosthetic size (size method). Compared with known in vitro prosthetic valve areas, the LVOT method (r = 0.86; standard error of the estimate +/- 0.16 cm2; p < 0.001) was more accurate than the size method (r = 0.74; standard error of the estimate +/- 0.40 cm2; p < 0.001). The prosthetic valve area estimated by the size method overestimated the area estimated by the LVOT method by an average of 15% +/- 23% (p < 0.001). This difference in area between the two methods has increased with the interval since implantation of the bioprosthesis (p = 0.01). It is concluded that prosthetic size should not be used instead of LVOT diameter during calculation of aortic prosthetic valve area. This restriction is particularly important in patients with older bioprosthesis.

Postoperative Doppler echocardiographic evaluation in different sizes of Medtronic-Hall, Biocor and Carpentier-Edwards S.A.V. prosthetic aortic valves

Doppler echocardiography was performed on 108 patients 4-15 days after implantation of a Medtronic-Hall, Biocor or Carpentier-Edwards S.A.V. prosthetic aortic valve because of aortic stenosis. Significant correlation was found between the in vitro (maker-declared) and the Doppler-estimated effective prosthetic valve orifice area (r = 0.70, p < 0.01). Doppler-estimated prosthetic valve orifice area, but not transprosthetic blood velocities, discriminated between different sizes of Medtronic-Hall and Biocor valves. The effective orifice area in these valves was 57% of the in vitro area, but in Carpentier-Edwards valves it was only 43%. Transprosthetic blood velocity was inversely related to orifice area in men, but not in women, who also had longer duration of systole and better preservation of systolic left ventricular function. The data suggest that the effective prosthetic valve areas found in patients are significantly smaller than the experimental in vitro areas. Prosthesis size and type, anatomic and hemodynamic variables and gender are important in Doppler estimation of effective valve area.

Cross-sectional left ventricular outflow tract velocities before and after aortic valve replacement: a comparative study with two-dimensional Doppler ultrasound

To assess whether aortic valve replacement (AVR) results in changes in the flow velocity distribution in the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT), 10 patients undergoing AVR for aortic stenosis were studied. By extracting velocity information from color flow maps as digital data, instantaneous cross-sectional velocity profiles were constructed. Velocity profiles obtained 1 to 3 days before AVR were compared with recordings made 3 months later. The LVOT velocity profiles were variably skewed both before and after surgery, and no systematic or uniform changes could be detected after AVR. The highest velocities were most often localized in the region from the center of the outflow tract diameter toward the septum both before and after surgery. At the time of peak flow the ratio of the maximum to the cross-sectional mean velocity was 1.38 +/- 0.13 before and 1.39 +/- 0.08 after AVR (NS), and the ratio of the maximum to the mean velocity time integral was 1.47 +/- 0.10 before and 1.56 +/- 0.10 after (NS). We conclude that AVR in patients with aortic stenosis does not result in a change in LVOT velocity profiles that will influence stroke volume estimates with the Doppler technique.

Echocardiographic description of the CarboMedics bileaflet prosthetic heart valve

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to describe the echocardiographic appearance of the normal CarboMedics prosthesis in the aortic and mitral positions.

BACKGROUND

Echocardiography is the standard method of assessing prosthetic valves. However, new valve designs may still be marketed without an accompanying echocardiographic description. The CarboMedics prosthesis is in widespread use, but few noninvasive hemodynamic data have been published.

METHODS

Echocardiography was performed in 147 patients with a total of 96 normally functioning CarboMedics prostheses in the aortic position and 75 in the mitral position; in 24 patients, valves were implanted in both positions. The following variables were measured: peak and mean transvalvular velocities, peak and mean instantaneous gradient estimated from the modified Bernoulli equation, aortic acceleration slope, pressure half-time, transvalvular flow and effective orifice area using the continuity equation. Patterns of regurgitation were observed by transthoracic study in all valves and by transesophageal study in selected mitral valve prostheses.

RESULTS

For the aortic valve prostheses, estimated mean gradient ranged between 6 and 19 mm Hg. Effective area differed markedly among the anulus diameters (p < 0.001), with a mean value of 1 cm2 for the 19-mm valve and 2.6 cm2 for the 29-mm valve. For the mitral valve prostheses, mean gradient ranged from 3 to 7 mm Hg. There were a total of four washing leaks, one on either side of each pivotal point, and these lasted throughout systole or diastole. One jet was commonly more prominent than the other three.

CONCLUSIONS

The CarboMedics prosthesis offered relatively little resistance to forward flow except at small anulus diameters. The washing jets were prominent and would be easy to misdiagnose as a sign of paraprosthetic regurgitation.

Stentless porcine and pericardial valve in aortic position

Fifty-seven patients underwent aortic valve replacement with a stentless glutaraldehyde-fixed bioprosthesis; 27 received a porcine aortic valve and 30 had a bovine pericardial valve. Two groups of 30 patients each who had aortic valve replacement with a tilting-disc mechanical valve or a stented porcine bioprosthesis served as controls. There were no differences in sex, body surface area, valve lesion, and valve size among the four groups. Results were assessed on a Doppler-based determination of maximum velocity across the valve, aortic valve area, and degree of valve regurgitation. Velocity across the valve was significantly less with stentless pericardial valves than with stentless porcine valves, stented bioprostheses, and mechanical valves. Stentless valves had a significantly larger aortic valve area when compared with stented valves. Mild central aortic insufficiency was detected more often with stentless pericardial than with stentless porcine bioprostheses (p = 0.04). Stentless valves showed a higher incidence of complete atrioventricular block when compared with stented valves (p = 0.04). Long-term studies are now warranted to assess the durability of both types of stentless valves.

Hemodynamic evaluation by Doppler echocardiography of small (less than or equal to 21 mm) prostheses and bioprostheses in the aortic valve position

To assess resting hemodynamics of an unselected group of patients with prostheses or bioprostheses sized less than or equal to 21 mm implanted into the aortic valve position during a 7-year period, 46 of 50 eligible patients were examined by Doppler echocardiography. The valves were Carpentier-Edwards (CE) supraannular 21 mm (n = 8), Medtronic-Hall (MH) 20 mm (n = 8) and 21 mm (n = 21), and the rest (n = 9) were other valves with only 1 to 3 patients in each group. Gradients, valve areas and dimensionless obstruction indexes (ratio of subvalvular/valvular velocities and velocity time integrals) were compared. By analysis of variance, gradients did not differ significantly between the CE supraannular 21 mm, the MH 20 and 21 mm prostheses (peak/mean 25 +/- 8/14 +/- 5, 31 +/- 13/16 +/- 6 and 25 +/- 10/13 +/- 5 mm Hg; p = not significant). Only 2 patients had a mean gradient greater than 25 mm Hg. The valve area was slightly larger for the MH 21 mm group compared with the CE supraannular 21 mm group (1.34 +/- 0.15 vs 1.16 +/- 0.14 cm2, p less than 0.05). The dimensionless obstruction indexes did not differ (CE supraannular 21 mm 0.36 +/- 0.07/0.40 +/- 0.07 (velocities/velocity time integrals), MH 20 mm 0.40 +/- 0.12/0.47 +/- 0.12, MH 21 mm 0.38 +/- 0.05/0.44 +/- 0.06; p = not significant).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)