Dataset Information

Hemodynamic Modeling of Biological Aortic Valve Replacement Using Preoperative Data Only.

ABSTRACT: Objectives: Prediction of aortic hemodynamics after aortic valve replacement (AVR) could help optimize treatment planning and improve outcomes. This study aims to demonstrate an approach to predict postoperative maximum velocity, maximum pressure gradient, secondary flow degree (SFD), and normalized flow displacement (NFD) in patients receiving biological AVR. Methods: Virtual AVR was performed for 10 patients, who received actual AVR with a biological prosthesis. The virtual AVRs used only preoperative anatomical and 4D flow MRI data. Subsequently, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations were performed and the abovementioned hemodynamic parameters compared between postoperative 4D flow MRI data and CFD results. Results: For maximum velocities and pressure gradients, postoperative 4D flow MRI data and CFD results were strongly correlated (R ² = 0.75 and R ² = 0.81) with low root mean square error (0.21 m/s and 3.8 mmHg). SFD and NFD were moderately and weakly correlated at R ² = 0.44 and R ² = 0.20, respectively. Flow visualization through streamlines indicates good qualitative agreement between 4D flow MRI data and CFD results in most cases. Conclusion: The approach presented here seems suitable to estimate postoperative maximum velocity and pressure gradient in patients receiving biological AVR, using only preoperative MRI data. The workflow can be performed in a reasonable time frame and offers a method to estimate postoperative valve prosthesis performance and to identify patients at risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch preoperatively. Novel parameters, such as SFD and NFD, appear to be more sensitive, and estimation seems harder. Further workflow optimization and validation of results seems warranted.

SUBMITTER: Hellmeier F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7900157 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Hemodynamic Modeling of Biological Aortic Valve Replacement Using Preoperative Data Only.

Hellmeier Florian F Brüning Jan J Sündermann Simon S Jarmatz Lina L Schafstedde Marie M Goubergrits Leonid L Kühne Titus T Nordmeyer Sarah S

Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine 20210209

<b>Objectives:</b> Prediction of aortic hemodynamics after aortic valve replacement (AVR) could help optimize treatment planning and improve outcomes. This study aims to demonstrate an approach to predict postoperative maximum velocity, maximum pressure gradient, secondary flow degree (SFD), and normalized flow displacement (NFD) in patients receiving biological AVR. <b>Methods:</b> Virtual AVR was performed for 10 patients, who received actual AVR with a biological prosthesis. The virtual AVRs ...[more]

PMID: 33634167

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStudies assessing outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (AS) with hemodynamic subtypes have demonstrated mixed results with respect to outcomes and periprocedural complications. This study aimed to assess the outcomes of TAVR in patients across various hemodynamic subtypes of severe AS.MethodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched through September 2023 to identify all observational studies comparing outcomes of TAVR in patients with paradoxical low flow low gradient (pLFLG), classic LFLG, and high gradient AS (HGAS). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). The secondary outcomes were components of MACE (mortality, myocardial infarction [MI], stroke). A bivariate, influential, and frequentist network meta-analysis model was used to obtain the net odds ratio (OR) with a 95% CI.ResultsA total of 21 studies comprising 17,298 (8742 experimental and 8556 HGAS) patients were included in the quantitative analysis. TAVR was associated with a significant reduction in the mean aortic gradient, and an increase in the mean aortic valve area irrespective of the AS type. Compared with HGAS, TAVR in classic LFLG had a significantly higher (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.04-2.72), while pLFLG (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.72-1.35) had a statistically similar incidence of MACE at a median follow-up of 1-year. TAVR in LFLG also had a significantly higher need for surgery (OR, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.24-10.32), and a greater risk of periprocedural (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.17-3.41), 1-month (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.08-2.64), and 12-month (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.05-1.88) mortality compared with HGAS. The incidence of MI, major bleeding, vascular complications, paravalvular leak, pacemaker implantation, and rehospitalizations was not significantly different between all other types of AS (HGAS vs LFLG, pLFLG).ConclusionsTAVR is an effective strategy in severe AS irrespective of the hemodynamic subtypes. Relatively, pLFLG did not have significantly different risk of periprocedural complications compared with HGAS, while classical LFLG AS had higher risk of MACE, primarily driven by the greater mortality risk.

Dataset Information

Hemodynamic Modeling of Biological Aortic Valve Replacement Using Preoperative Data Only.

Publications

Hemodynamic Modeling of Biological Aortic Valve Replacement Using Preoperative Data Only.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets