TY - JOUR
T1 - Vector Flow Imaging of the Ascending Aorta in Patients with Tricuspid and Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis Treated with Biological and Mechanical Implants
AU - Hansen, Kristoffer Lindskov
AU - Møller-Sørensen, Hasse
AU - Kjaergaard, Jesper
AU - Jensen, Jørgen Arendt
AU - Nielsen, Michael Bachmann
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - —Aortic valve stenosis (AS) is treated with biological prostheses (BPs) and mechanical prostheses (MPs). Vector flow imaging (VFI), an angle-independent ultrasound method, can quantify flow complexity (vector concentration (VC)) and secondary rotation (SR). Ten patients (mean age: 70.7 y) with tricuspid AS scheduled for BPs, 10 patients (mean age: 56.2 y) with bicuspid AS scheduled for MPs and 10 patients (mean age: 63.9 y) with normal aortic valves were scanned intra-operatively on the ascending aorta with VFI and conventional spectral Doppler. Bicuspid AS (peak systolic velocity (PSV): 380.9 cm/s, SR: 16.7 Hz, VC: 0.21) had more complex flow (p < 0.02) than tricuspid AS (PSV: 346.1 cm/s, SR: 17.1 Hz, VC: 0.33). Both groups had more complex and faster flow (p < 0.0001) than normal aortic valve patients (PSV: 124.0 cm/s, SR: 4.3 Hz, VC: 0.79). VC (r = 0.87) and SR (r = 0.89) correlated to PSV. After surgery, flow parameters changed (p < 0.0001) for patients with MPs (PSV: 250.4 cm/s, SR: 9.8 Hz, VC: 0.54) and BPs (PSV: 232.4 cm/s, SR: 12.5 Hz, VC: 0.61), with MPs having slower SR (p < 0.01). None of the implants had normal flow (p < 0.0001). In conclusion, VFI can provide new flow parameters for AS and implant assessment.
AB - —Aortic valve stenosis (AS) is treated with biological prostheses (BPs) and mechanical prostheses (MPs). Vector flow imaging (VFI), an angle-independent ultrasound method, can quantify flow complexity (vector concentration (VC)) and secondary rotation (SR). Ten patients (mean age: 70.7 y) with tricuspid AS scheduled for BPs, 10 patients (mean age: 56.2 y) with bicuspid AS scheduled for MPs and 10 patients (mean age: 63.9 y) with normal aortic valves were scanned intra-operatively on the ascending aorta with VFI and conventional spectral Doppler. Bicuspid AS (peak systolic velocity (PSV): 380.9 cm/s, SR: 16.7 Hz, VC: 0.21) had more complex flow (p < 0.02) than tricuspid AS (PSV: 346.1 cm/s, SR: 17.1 Hz, VC: 0.33). Both groups had more complex and faster flow (p < 0.0001) than normal aortic valve patients (PSV: 124.0 cm/s, SR: 4.3 Hz, VC: 0.79). VC (r = 0.87) and SR (r = 0.89) correlated to PSV. After surgery, flow parameters changed (p < 0.0001) for patients with MPs (PSV: 250.4 cm/s, SR: 9.8 Hz, VC: 0.54) and BPs (PSV: 232.4 cm/s, SR: 12.5 Hz, VC: 0.61), with MPs having slower SR (p < 0.01). None of the implants had normal flow (p < 0.0001). In conclusion, VFI can provide new flow parameters for AS and implant assessment.
KW - Vector flow imaging
KW - Vector concentration
KW - Secondary rotation
KW - Aortic valve stenosis
KW - Bicuspid aortic valve
KW - Mechanical valve
U2 - 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2019.09.020
DO - 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2019.09.020
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 31677849
SN - 0301-5629
VL - 46
SP - 64
EP - 72
JO - Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
JF - Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
IS - 1
ER -