Hemodynamic diagnostics of epicardial coronary stenoses: in-vitro experimental and computational study

BackgroundThe severity of epicardial coronary stenosis can be assessed by invasive measurements of trans-stenotic pressure drop and flow. A pressure or flow sensor-tipped guidewire inserted across the coronary stenosis causes an overestimation in true trans-stenotic pressure drop and reduction in coronary flow. This may mask the true severity of coronary stenosis. In order to unmask the true severity of epicardial stenosis, we evaluate a diagnostic parameter, which is obtained from fundamental fluid dynamics principles. This experimental and numerical study focuses on the characterization of the diagnostic parameter, pressure drop coefficient, and also evaluates the pressure recovery downstream of stenoses.MethodsThree models of coronary stenosis namely, moderate, intermediate and severe stenosis, were manufactured and tested in the in-vitro set-up simulating the epicardial coronary network. The trans-stenotic pressure drop and flow distal to stenosis models were measured by non-invasive method, using external pressure and flow sensors, and by invasive method, following guidewire insertion across the stenosis. The viscous and momentum-change components of the pressure drop for various flow rates were evaluated from quadratic relation between pressure drop and flow. Finally, the pressure drop coefficient (CDPe) was calculated as the ratio of pressure drop and distal dynamic pressure. The pressure recovery factor (η) was calculated as the ratio of pressure recovery coefficient and the area blockage.ResultsThe mean pressure drop-flow characteristics before and during guidewire insertion indicated that increasing stenosis causes a shift in dominance from viscous pressure to momentum forces. However, for intermediate (~80%) area stenosis, which is between moderate (~65%) and severe (~90%) area stenoses, both losses were similar in magnitude. Therefore, guidewire insertion plays a critical role in evaluating the hemodynamic severity of coronary stenosis. More importantly, mean CDPe increased (17 ± 3.3 to 287 ± 52, n = 3, p < 0.01) and mean η decreased (0.54 ± 0.04 to 0.37 ± 0.05, p < 0.01) from moderate to severe stenosis during guidewire insertion.ConclusionThe wide range of CDPe is not affected that much by the presence of guidewire. CDPe can be used in clinical practice to evaluate the true severity of coronary stenosis due to its significant difference between values measured at moderate and severe stenoses.

[1]  A. Yeung,et al.  Simultaneous Assessment of Fractional and Coronary Flow Reserves in Cardiac Transplant Recipients: Physiologic Investigation for Transplant Arteriopathy (PITA Study) , 2003, Circulation.

[2]  W. Paulus,et al.  Transstenotic coronary pressure gradient measurement in humans: in vitro and in vivo evaluation of a new pressure monitoring angioplasty guide wire. , 1993, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  G W Hamilton,et al.  Physiologic basis for assessing critical coronary stenosis. Instantaneous flow response and regional distribution during coronary hyperemia as measures of coronary flow reserve. , 1974, The American journal of cardiology.

[4]  D. F. Young,et al.  Flow characteristics in models of arterial stenoses. II. Unsteady flow. , 1973, Journal of biomechanics.

[5]  S. M. Collins,et al.  The effect of coronary angioplasty on coronary flow reserve. , 1988, Circulation.

[6]  A. Sinha Roy,et al.  Characterizing momentum change and viscous loss of a hemodynamic endpoint in assessment of coronary lesions. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[7]  R. Banerjee,et al.  In Vitro Quantification of Guidewire Flow-Obstruction Effect in Model Coronary Stenoses for Interventional Diagnostic Procedure , 2007 .

[8]  E L Bolson,et al.  Dynamic mechanisms in human coronary stenosis. , 1984, Circulation.

[9]  Maria Siebes,et al.  Single-Wire Pressure and Flow Velocity Measurement to Quantify Coronary Stenosis Hemodynamics and Effects of Percutaneous Interventions , 2004, Circulation.

[10]  Rodney A. White,et al.  Hemodynamic Consequences of Stenosis Remodeling During Coronary Angioplasty , 1997, Angiology.

[11]  L. Tenerz,et al.  Initial experiences with a miniaturized pressure transducer during coronary angioplasty. , 1991, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[12]  Young I Cho,et al.  Physiological flow analysis in significant human coronary artery stenoses. , 2003, Biorheology.

[13]  A. Lefebvre Gas Turbine Combustion , 1983 .

[14]  Maria Siebes,et al.  Physiological assessment of coronary artery disease in the cardiac catheterization laboratory: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization, Council on Clinical Cardiology. , 2006, Circulation.

[15]  H V Anderson,et al.  Measurement of transstenotic pressure gradient during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. , 1986, Circulation.

[16]  Maria Siebes,et al.  Effect of simultaneous intracoronary guidewires on the predictive accuracy of functional parameters of coronary lesion severity. , 2007, American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology.

[17]  Prabir Daripa,et al.  A numerical study of pulsatile blood flow in an eccentric catheterized artery using a fast algorithm , 2002 .

[18]  L. Back,et al.  Estimated mean flow resistance increase during coronary artery catheterization. , 1994, Journal of biomechanics.

[19]  D W Crawford,et al.  Experimental study of pulsatile and steady flow through a smooth tube and an atherosclerotic coronary artery casting of man. , 1983, Journal of biomechanics.

[20]  W. Wijns,et al.  Simultaneous coronary pressure and flow velocity measurements in humans. Feasibility, reproducibility, and hemodynamic dependence of coronary flow velocity reserve, hyperemic flow versus pressure slope index, and fractional flow reserve. , 1996, Circulation.

[21]  J. Tarbell,et al.  Evaluation of a transparent blood analog fluid: aqueous xanthan gum/glycerin. , 1993, Biorheology.

[22]  M. Kern,et al.  Alterations of phasic coronary artery flow velocity in humans during percutaneous coronary angioplasty. , 1992, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[23]  Y. Cho,et al.  Effects of the non-Newtonian viscosity of blood on flows in a diseased arterial vessel. Part 1: Steady flows. , 1991, Biorheology.

[24]  A. Sinha Roy,et al.  Delineating the guide-wire flow obstruction effect in assessment of fractional flow reserve and coronary flow reserve measurements. , 2005, American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology.

[25]  Y. Cho,et al.  Physiological flow simulation in residual human stenoses after coronary angioplasty. , 2000, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[26]  L. Back,et al.  Flow rate-pressure drop relation in coronary angioplasty: catheter obstruction effect. , 1996, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[27]  M. Büchi,et al.  Impact of Doppler guidewire size and flow rates on intravascular velocity profiles. , 1998, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[28]  P. H. van der Voort,et al.  Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  K. Lipscomb,et al.  Instantaneous Flow Response and Regional Distribution During Coronary Hyperemia as Measures of Coronary Flow Reserve , 1974 .