Cargando…

The influence of left ventricular assist device inflow cannula position on thrombosis risk

The use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as a treatment method for heart failure patients has been steadily increasing; however, pathological studies showed presence of thrombi around the HeartWare ventricular assist device inflow cannula (IC) in more than 95% of patients after device expl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ghodrati, Mojgan, Maurer, Alexander, Schlöglhofer, Thomas, Khienwad, Thananya, Zimpfer, Daniel, Beitzke, Dietrich, Zonta, Francesco, Moscato, Francesco, Schima, Heinrich, Aigner, Philipp
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7496759/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32302423
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aor.13705
_version_ 1783583169439596544
author Ghodrati, Mojgan
Maurer, Alexander
Schlöglhofer, Thomas
Khienwad, Thananya
Zimpfer, Daniel
Beitzke, Dietrich
Zonta, Francesco
Moscato, Francesco
Schima, Heinrich
Aigner, Philipp
author_facet Ghodrati, Mojgan
Maurer, Alexander
Schlöglhofer, Thomas
Khienwad, Thananya
Zimpfer, Daniel
Beitzke, Dietrich
Zonta, Francesco
Moscato, Francesco
Schima, Heinrich
Aigner, Philipp
author_sort Ghodrati, Mojgan
collection PubMed
description The use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as a treatment method for heart failure patients has been steadily increasing; however, pathological studies showed presence of thrombi around the HeartWare ventricular assist device inflow cannula (IC) in more than 95% of patients after device explantation. Flow fields around the IC might trigger thrombus formation and require further investigation. In this study flow dynamics parameters were evaluated for different patient geometries using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations. Left ventricular (LV) models of two LVAD patients were obtained from CT scans. The LV volumes of Patient 1 (P1) and Patient 2 (P2) were 264 and 114 cm(3) with an IC angle of 20° and 9° from the mitral‐IC tip axis at the coronal plane. The IC insertion site at the apex was central for P1, whereas it was lateral for P2. Transient CFD simulations were performed over 9 cardiac cycles. The wedge area was defined from the cannula tip to the wall of the LV apex. Mean velocity magnitude and blood stagnation region (volume with mean velocity <5 mm/s) as well as the wall shear stress (WSS) at the IC surface were calculated. Cardiac support resulted in a flow mainly crossing the ventricle from the mitral valve to the LVAD cannula for P2, while the main inflow jet deviated toward the septal wall in P1. Lower WSS at the IC surface and consequently larger stagnation volumes were observed for P2 (P1: 0.17, P2: 0.77 cm(3)). Flow fields around an LVAD cannula can be influenced by many parameters such as LV size, IC angle, and implantation site. Careful consideration of influencing parameters is essential to get reliable evaluations of the apical flow field and its connection to apical thrombus formation. Higher blood washout and lower stagnation were observed for a central implantation of the IC at the apex.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7496759
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74967592020-09-25 The influence of left ventricular assist device inflow cannula position on thrombosis risk Ghodrati, Mojgan Maurer, Alexander Schlöglhofer, Thomas Khienwad, Thananya Zimpfer, Daniel Beitzke, Dietrich Zonta, Francesco Moscato, Francesco Schima, Heinrich Aigner, Philipp Artif Organs Main Text Articles The use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as a treatment method for heart failure patients has been steadily increasing; however, pathological studies showed presence of thrombi around the HeartWare ventricular assist device inflow cannula (IC) in more than 95% of patients after device explantation. Flow fields around the IC might trigger thrombus formation and require further investigation. In this study flow dynamics parameters were evaluated for different patient geometries using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations. Left ventricular (LV) models of two LVAD patients were obtained from CT scans. The LV volumes of Patient 1 (P1) and Patient 2 (P2) were 264 and 114 cm(3) with an IC angle of 20° and 9° from the mitral‐IC tip axis at the coronal plane. The IC insertion site at the apex was central for P1, whereas it was lateral for P2. Transient CFD simulations were performed over 9 cardiac cycles. The wedge area was defined from the cannula tip to the wall of the LV apex. Mean velocity magnitude and blood stagnation region (volume with mean velocity <5 mm/s) as well as the wall shear stress (WSS) at the IC surface were calculated. Cardiac support resulted in a flow mainly crossing the ventricle from the mitral valve to the LVAD cannula for P2, while the main inflow jet deviated toward the septal wall in P1. Lower WSS at the IC surface and consequently larger stagnation volumes were observed for P2 (P1: 0.17, P2: 0.77 cm(3)). Flow fields around an LVAD cannula can be influenced by many parameters such as LV size, IC angle, and implantation site. Careful consideration of influencing parameters is essential to get reliable evaluations of the apical flow field and its connection to apical thrombus formation. Higher blood washout and lower stagnation were observed for a central implantation of the IC at the apex. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-05-06 2020-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7496759/ /pubmed/32302423 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aor.13705 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Artificial Organs published by International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Main Text Articles
Ghodrati, Mojgan
Maurer, Alexander
Schlöglhofer, Thomas
Khienwad, Thananya
Zimpfer, Daniel
Beitzke, Dietrich
Zonta, Francesco
Moscato, Francesco
Schima, Heinrich
Aigner, Philipp
The influence of left ventricular assist device inflow cannula position on thrombosis risk
title The influence of left ventricular assist device inflow cannula position on thrombosis risk
title_full The influence of left ventricular assist device inflow cannula position on thrombosis risk
title_fullStr The influence of left ventricular assist device inflow cannula position on thrombosis risk
title_full_unstemmed The influence of left ventricular assist device inflow cannula position on thrombosis risk
title_short The influence of left ventricular assist device inflow cannula position on thrombosis risk
title_sort influence of left ventricular assist device inflow cannula position on thrombosis risk
topic Main Text Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7496759/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32302423
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aor.13705
work_keys_str_mv AT ghodratimojgan theinfluenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT maureralexander theinfluenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT schloglhoferthomas theinfluenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT khienwadthananya theinfluenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT zimpferdaniel theinfluenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT beitzkedietrich theinfluenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT zontafrancesco theinfluenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT moscatofrancesco theinfluenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT schimaheinrich theinfluenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT aignerphilipp theinfluenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT ghodratimojgan influenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT maureralexander influenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT schloglhoferthomas influenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT khienwadthananya influenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT zimpferdaniel influenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT beitzkedietrich influenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT zontafrancesco influenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT moscatofrancesco influenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT schimaheinrich influenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk
AT aignerphilipp influenceofleftventricularassistdeviceinflowcannulapositiononthrombosisrisk