Cargando…

Blood speckle imaging compared with conventional Doppler ultrasound for transvalvular pressure drop estimation in an aortic flow phantom

BACKGROUND: Transvalvular pressure drops are assessed using Doppler echocardiography for the diagnosis of heart valve disease. However, this method is highly user-dependent and may overestimate transvalvular pressure drops by up to 54%. This work aimed to assess transvalvular pressure drops using ve...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dockerill, Cameron, Gill, Harminder, Fernandes, Joao Filipe, Nio, Amanda Q. X., Rajani, Ronak, Lamata, Pablo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9287947/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35840940
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12947-022-00286-1
_version_ 1784748358590529536
author Dockerill, Cameron
Gill, Harminder
Fernandes, Joao Filipe
Nio, Amanda Q. X.
Rajani, Ronak
Lamata, Pablo
author_facet Dockerill, Cameron
Gill, Harminder
Fernandes, Joao Filipe
Nio, Amanda Q. X.
Rajani, Ronak
Lamata, Pablo
author_sort Dockerill, Cameron
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Transvalvular pressure drops are assessed using Doppler echocardiography for the diagnosis of heart valve disease. However, this method is highly user-dependent and may overestimate transvalvular pressure drops by up to 54%. This work aimed to assess transvalvular pressure drops using velocity fields derived from blood speckle imaging (BSI), as a potential alternative to Doppler.  METHODS: A silicone 3D-printed aortic valve model, segmented from a healthy CT scan, was placed within a silicone tube. A CardioFlow 5000MR flow pump was used to circulate blood mimicking fluid to create eight different stenotic conditions. Eight PendoTech pressure sensors were embedded along the tube wall to record ground-truth pressures (10 kHz). The simplified Bernoulli equation with measured probe angle correction was used to estimate pressure drop from maximum velocity values acquired across the valve using Doppler and BSI with a GE Vivid E95 ultrasound machine and 6S-D cardiac phased array transducer. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between pressure drops estimated by Doppler, BSI and ground-truth at the lowest stenotic condition (10.4 ± 1.76, 10.3 ± 1.63 vs. 10.5 ± 1.00 mmHg, respectively; p > 0.05). Significant differences were observed between the pressure drops estimated by the three methods at the greatest stenotic condition (26.4 ± 1.52, 14.5 ± 2.14 vs. 20.9 ± 1.92 mmHg for Doppler, BSI and ground-truth, respectively; p < 0.05). Across all conditions, Doppler overestimated pressure drop (Bias = 3.92 mmHg), while BSI underestimated pressure drop (Bias = -3.31 mmHg). CONCLUSIONS: BSI accurately estimated pressure drops only up to 10.5 mmHg in controlled phantom conditions of low stenotic burden. Doppler overestimated pressure drops of 20.9 mmHg. Although BSI offers a number of theoretical advantages to conventional Doppler echocardiography, further refinements and clinical studies are required with BSI before it can be used to improve transvalvular pressure drop estimation in the clinical evaluation of aortic stenosis. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12947-022-00286-1.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9287947
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92879472022-07-17 Blood speckle imaging compared with conventional Doppler ultrasound for transvalvular pressure drop estimation in an aortic flow phantom Dockerill, Cameron Gill, Harminder Fernandes, Joao Filipe Nio, Amanda Q. X. Rajani, Ronak Lamata, Pablo Cardiovasc Ultrasound Research BACKGROUND: Transvalvular pressure drops are assessed using Doppler echocardiography for the diagnosis of heart valve disease. However, this method is highly user-dependent and may overestimate transvalvular pressure drops by up to 54%. This work aimed to assess transvalvular pressure drops using velocity fields derived from blood speckle imaging (BSI), as a potential alternative to Doppler.  METHODS: A silicone 3D-printed aortic valve model, segmented from a healthy CT scan, was placed within a silicone tube. A CardioFlow 5000MR flow pump was used to circulate blood mimicking fluid to create eight different stenotic conditions. Eight PendoTech pressure sensors were embedded along the tube wall to record ground-truth pressures (10 kHz). The simplified Bernoulli equation with measured probe angle correction was used to estimate pressure drop from maximum velocity values acquired across the valve using Doppler and BSI with a GE Vivid E95 ultrasound machine and 6S-D cardiac phased array transducer. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between pressure drops estimated by Doppler, BSI and ground-truth at the lowest stenotic condition (10.4 ± 1.76, 10.3 ± 1.63 vs. 10.5 ± 1.00 mmHg, respectively; p > 0.05). Significant differences were observed between the pressure drops estimated by the three methods at the greatest stenotic condition (26.4 ± 1.52, 14.5 ± 2.14 vs. 20.9 ± 1.92 mmHg for Doppler, BSI and ground-truth, respectively; p < 0.05). Across all conditions, Doppler overestimated pressure drop (Bias = 3.92 mmHg), while BSI underestimated pressure drop (Bias = -3.31 mmHg). CONCLUSIONS: BSI accurately estimated pressure drops only up to 10.5 mmHg in controlled phantom conditions of low stenotic burden. Doppler overestimated pressure drops of 20.9 mmHg. Although BSI offers a number of theoretical advantages to conventional Doppler echocardiography, further refinements and clinical studies are required with BSI before it can be used to improve transvalvular pressure drop estimation in the clinical evaluation of aortic stenosis. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12947-022-00286-1. BioMed Central 2022-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9287947/ /pubmed/35840940 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12947-022-00286-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Dockerill, Cameron
Gill, Harminder
Fernandes, Joao Filipe
Nio, Amanda Q. X.
Rajani, Ronak
Lamata, Pablo
Blood speckle imaging compared with conventional Doppler ultrasound for transvalvular pressure drop estimation in an aortic flow phantom
title Blood speckle imaging compared with conventional Doppler ultrasound for transvalvular pressure drop estimation in an aortic flow phantom
title_full Blood speckle imaging compared with conventional Doppler ultrasound for transvalvular pressure drop estimation in an aortic flow phantom
title_fullStr Blood speckle imaging compared with conventional Doppler ultrasound for transvalvular pressure drop estimation in an aortic flow phantom
title_full_unstemmed Blood speckle imaging compared with conventional Doppler ultrasound for transvalvular pressure drop estimation in an aortic flow phantom
title_short Blood speckle imaging compared with conventional Doppler ultrasound for transvalvular pressure drop estimation in an aortic flow phantom
title_sort blood speckle imaging compared with conventional doppler ultrasound for transvalvular pressure drop estimation in an aortic flow phantom
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9287947/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35840940
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12947-022-00286-1
work_keys_str_mv AT dockerillcameron bloodspeckleimagingcomparedwithconventionaldopplerultrasoundfortransvalvularpressuredropestimationinanaorticflowphantom
AT gillharminder bloodspeckleimagingcomparedwithconventionaldopplerultrasoundfortransvalvularpressuredropestimationinanaorticflowphantom
AT fernandesjoaofilipe bloodspeckleimagingcomparedwithconventionaldopplerultrasoundfortransvalvularpressuredropestimationinanaorticflowphantom
AT nioamandaqx bloodspeckleimagingcomparedwithconventionaldopplerultrasoundfortransvalvularpressuredropestimationinanaorticflowphantom
AT rajanironak bloodspeckleimagingcomparedwithconventionaldopplerultrasoundfortransvalvularpressuredropestimationinanaorticflowphantom
AT lamatapablo bloodspeckleimagingcomparedwithconventionaldopplerultrasoundfortransvalvularpressuredropestimationinanaorticflowphantom