Analytical modeling of the instantaneous pressure gradient across the aortic valve.

Aortic stenosis is the most frequent valvular heart disease. The mean systolic value of the transvalvular pressure gradient (TPG) is commonly utilized during clinical examination to evaluate its severity and it can be determined either by cardiac catheterization or by Doppler echocardiography. TPG is highly time-dependent over systole and is known to depend upon the transvalvular flow rate, the effective orifice area (EOA) of the aortic valve and the cross-sectional area of the ascending aorta. However it is still unclear how these parameters modify the TPG waveform. We thus derived a simple analytical model from the energy loss concept to describe the instantaneous TPG across the aortic valve during systole. This theoretical model was validated with orifice plates and bioprosthetic heart valves in an in vitro aortic flow model. Instantaneous TPG was measured by catheter and its waveform was compared with the one determined from the transvalvular flow rate, the valvular EOA and the aortic cross-sectional area, using the derived equation. Our results showed a very good concordance between the measured and predicted instantaneous TPG. The analytical model proposed and validated in this study provides a comprehensive description of the aortic valve hemodynamics that can be used to accurately predict the instantaneous transvalvular pressure gradient in native and bioprosthetic aortic valves. The consideration of this model suggests that: (1) TPG waveform is exclusively dependent upon transvalvular flow rate and flow geometry, (2) the frequently applied simplified Bernoulli equation may overestimate mean TPG by more than 30% and (3) the measurement of ejection time by cardiac catheterization may underestimate the actual ejection time, especially in patients with mild/moderate aortic stenosis and low cardiac output.

[1]  Damien Garcia,et al.  Discrepancies between catheter and Doppler estimates of valve effective orifice area can be predicted from the pressure recovery phenomenon: practical implications with regard to quantification of aortic stenosis severity. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[2]  Javier Bermejo,et al.  In-vivo analysis of the instantaneous transvalvular pressure difference-flow relationship in aortic valve stenosis: implications of unsteady fluid-dynamics for the clinical assessment of disease severity. , 2002, The Journal of heart valve disease.

[3]  E. Antman,et al.  Guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: executive summary , 1998, Circulation.

[4]  N. Pandian,et al.  Variation of anatomic valve area during ejection in patients with valvular aortic stenosis evaluated by two-dimensional echocardiographic planimetry: comparison with traditional Doppler data. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  A. J. Ward-Smith Internal Fluid Flow: The Fluid Dynamics of Flow in Pipes and Ducts , 1980 .

[6]  W. Godwin Article in Press , 2000 .

[7]  Bjørn Olav Haugen,et al.  Blood flow velocity profiles in the aortic annulus: a 3-dimensional freehand color flow Doppler imaging study. , 2002, Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography.

[8]  R. Gibbons,et al.  Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease Executive Summary A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease) , 1998 .

[9]  B. Carabello,et al.  Aortic stenosis , 2018, Rapid Cardiac Care.

[10]  S C Koenig,et al.  Electric analog model of the aortic valve for calculation of continuous beat-to-beat aortic flow using a pressure gradient. , 1999, ASAIO journal.

[11]  C. Clark Relation between pressure difference across the aortic valve and left ventricular outflow. , 1978, Cardiovascular research.

[12]  G B Fiore,et al.  Hydraulic functional characterisation of aortic mechanical heart valve prostheses through lumped-parameter modelling. , 2002, Journal of biomechanics.

[13]  G Maurer,et al.  "Overestimation" of catheter gradients by Doppler ultrasound in patients with aortic stenosis: a predictable manifestation of pressure recovery. , 1999, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[14]  R. deKemp,et al.  Temporal variations in effective orifice area during ejection in patients with valvular aortic stenosis. , 2003, Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography : official publication of the American Society of Echocardiography.

[15]  K. Matre,et al.  Blood velocity distribution in the human ascending aorta. , 1987, Circulation.

[16]  W. Kussmaul,et al.  Valvular and systemic arterial hemodynamics in aortic valve stenosis. A model-based approach. , 1995, Circulation.

[17]  E. Lansac,et al.  A four-dimensional study of the aortic root dynamics. , 2002, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[18]  P. Pibarot,et al.  Assessment of aortic valve stenosis severity: A new index based on the energy loss concept. , 2000, Circulation.

[19]  G. Gerosa,et al.  Transaortic gradient is pressure-dependent in a pulsatile model of the circulation. , 1999, The Journal of heart valve disease.

[20]  E. Schwammenthal,et al.  Stenosis is in the eye of the observer: impact of pressure recovery on assessing aortic valve area. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.