Cargando…

Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis

BACKGROUND: Decisions in the management of aortic stenosis are based on the peak pressure drop, captured by Doppler echocardiography, whereas gold standard catheterization measurements assess the net pressure drop but are limited by associated risks. The relationship between these two measurements,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fernandes, Joao Filipe, Gill, Harminder, Nio, Amanda, Faraci, Alessandro, Galli, Valeria, Marlevi, David, Bissell, Malenka, Ha, Hojin, Rajani, Ronak, Mortier, Peter, Myerson, Saul G., Dyverfeldt, Petter, Ebbers, Tino, Nordsletten, David A., Lamata, Pablo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9885657/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36717885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-023-00914-3
_version_ 1784879974690324480
author Fernandes, Joao Filipe
Gill, Harminder
Nio, Amanda
Faraci, Alessandro
Galli, Valeria
Marlevi, David
Bissell, Malenka
Ha, Hojin
Rajani, Ronak
Mortier, Peter
Myerson, Saul G.
Dyverfeldt, Petter
Ebbers, Tino
Nordsletten, David A.
Lamata, Pablo
author_facet Fernandes, Joao Filipe
Gill, Harminder
Nio, Amanda
Faraci, Alessandro
Galli, Valeria
Marlevi, David
Bissell, Malenka
Ha, Hojin
Rajani, Ronak
Mortier, Peter
Myerson, Saul G.
Dyverfeldt, Petter
Ebbers, Tino
Nordsletten, David A.
Lamata, Pablo
author_sort Fernandes, Joao Filipe
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Decisions in the management of aortic stenosis are based on the peak pressure drop, captured by Doppler echocardiography, whereas gold standard catheterization measurements assess the net pressure drop but are limited by associated risks. The relationship between these two measurements, peak and net pressure drop, is dictated by the pressure recovery along the ascending aorta which is mainly caused by turbulence energy dissipation. Currently, pressure recovery is considered to occur within the first 40–50 mm distally from the aortic valve, albeit there is inconsistency across interventionist centers on where/how to position the catheter to capture the net pressure drop. METHODS: We developed a non-invasive method to assess the pressure recovery distance based on blood flow momentum via 4D Flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). Multi-center acquisitions included physical flow phantoms with different stenotic valve configurations to validate this method, first against reference measurements and then against turbulent energy dissipation (respectively n = 8 and n = 28 acquisitions) and to investigate the relationship between peak and net pressure drops. Finally, we explored the potential errors of cardiac catheterisation pressure recordings as a result of neglecting the pressure recovery distance in a clinical bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) cohort of n = 32 patients. RESULTS: In-vitro assessment of pressure recovery distance based on flow momentum achieved an average error of 1.8 ± 8.4 mm when compared to reference pressure sensors in the first phantom workbench. The momentum pressure recovery distance and the turbulent energy dissipation distance showed no statistical difference (mean difference of 2.8 ± 5.4 mm, R(2) = 0.93) in the second phantom workbench. A linear correlation was observed between peak and net pressure drops, however, with strong dependences on the valvular morphology. Finally, in the BAV cohort the pressure recovery distance was 78.8 ± 34.3 mm from vena contracta, which is significantly longer than currently accepted in clinical practise (40–50 mm), and 37.5% of patients displayed a pressure recovery distance beyond the end of the ascending aorta. CONCLUSION: The non-invasive assessment of the distance to pressure recovery is possible by tracking momentum via 4D Flow CMR. Recovery is not always complete at the ascending aorta, and catheterised recordings will overestimate the net pressure drop in those situations. There is a need to re-evaluate the methods that characterise the haemodynamic burden caused by aortic stenosis as currently clinically accepted pressure recovery distance is an underestimation. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12968-023-00914-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9885657
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98856572023-01-31 Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis Fernandes, Joao Filipe Gill, Harminder Nio, Amanda Faraci, Alessandro Galli, Valeria Marlevi, David Bissell, Malenka Ha, Hojin Rajani, Ronak Mortier, Peter Myerson, Saul G. Dyverfeldt, Petter Ebbers, Tino Nordsletten, David A. Lamata, Pablo J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Research BACKGROUND: Decisions in the management of aortic stenosis are based on the peak pressure drop, captured by Doppler echocardiography, whereas gold standard catheterization measurements assess the net pressure drop but are limited by associated risks. The relationship between these two measurements, peak and net pressure drop, is dictated by the pressure recovery along the ascending aorta which is mainly caused by turbulence energy dissipation. Currently, pressure recovery is considered to occur within the first 40–50 mm distally from the aortic valve, albeit there is inconsistency across interventionist centers on where/how to position the catheter to capture the net pressure drop. METHODS: We developed a non-invasive method to assess the pressure recovery distance based on blood flow momentum via 4D Flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). Multi-center acquisitions included physical flow phantoms with different stenotic valve configurations to validate this method, first against reference measurements and then against turbulent energy dissipation (respectively n = 8 and n = 28 acquisitions) and to investigate the relationship between peak and net pressure drops. Finally, we explored the potential errors of cardiac catheterisation pressure recordings as a result of neglecting the pressure recovery distance in a clinical bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) cohort of n = 32 patients. RESULTS: In-vitro assessment of pressure recovery distance based on flow momentum achieved an average error of 1.8 ± 8.4 mm when compared to reference pressure sensors in the first phantom workbench. The momentum pressure recovery distance and the turbulent energy dissipation distance showed no statistical difference (mean difference of 2.8 ± 5.4 mm, R(2) = 0.93) in the second phantom workbench. A linear correlation was observed between peak and net pressure drops, however, with strong dependences on the valvular morphology. Finally, in the BAV cohort the pressure recovery distance was 78.8 ± 34.3 mm from vena contracta, which is significantly longer than currently accepted in clinical practise (40–50 mm), and 37.5% of patients displayed a pressure recovery distance beyond the end of the ascending aorta. CONCLUSION: The non-invasive assessment of the distance to pressure recovery is possible by tracking momentum via 4D Flow CMR. Recovery is not always complete at the ascending aorta, and catheterised recordings will overestimate the net pressure drop in those situations. There is a need to re-evaluate the methods that characterise the haemodynamic burden caused by aortic stenosis as currently clinically accepted pressure recovery distance is an underestimation. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12968-023-00914-3. BioMed Central 2023-01-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9885657/ /pubmed/36717885 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-023-00914-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 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
Fernandes, Joao Filipe
Gill, Harminder
Nio, Amanda
Faraci, Alessandro
Galli, Valeria
Marlevi, David
Bissell, Malenka
Ha, Hojin
Rajani, Ronak
Mortier, Peter
Myerson, Saul G.
Dyverfeldt, Petter
Ebbers, Tino
Nordsletten, David A.
Lamata, Pablo
Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis
title Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis
title_full Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis
title_fullStr Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis
title_full_unstemmed Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis
title_short Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis
title_sort non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9885657/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36717885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-023-00914-3
work_keys_str_mv AT fernandesjoaofilipe noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT gillharminder noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT nioamanda noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT faracialessandro noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT gallivaleria noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT marlevidavid noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT bissellmalenka noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT hahojin noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT rajanironak noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT mortierpeter noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT myersonsaulg noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT dyverfeldtpetter noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT ebberstino noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT nordslettendavida noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis
AT lamatapablo noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis