Jeremy D Collins1, Edouard Semaan1, Alex Barker1, Patrick M McCarthy2, James C Carr1, Michael Markl3, S Chris Malaisrie4. 1. Department of Radiology, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois. 2. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois. 3. Department of Radiology, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; Department of Biomedical Engineering, McCormick School of Engineering, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois. 4. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois. Electronic address: malaisrie@northwestern.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to compare aortic hemodynamics and blood flow patterns using in-vivo four-dimensional (4D) flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients after valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) and aortic root replacement with bioprosthetic valves (BIO-ARR). METHODS: In-vivo 4D flow MRI was performed in 11 patients after VSARR (47 ± 18 years, 6 bicuspid aortic valves, 5 trileaflet aortic valves), 16 patients after BIO-ARR (52 ± 14 years), and 10 healthy controls (47 ± 16 years). Analysis included three-dimensional blood flow visualization and grading of helix flow in the ascending aorta (AAo) and arch. Peak systolic velocity was quantified in 9 analysis planes in the AAo, aortic arch, and descending aorta. Flow profile uniformity was evaluated in the aortic root and ascending aorta. RESULTS: Peak systolic velocity (2.0 to 2.5m/second) in the aortic root and AAo in both VSARR and BIO-ARR were elevated compared with controls (1.1 to 1.3m/second, p < 0.005). Flow asymmetry in BIO-ARR was increased compared with VSARR, evidenced by more AAo outflow jets (9 of 16 BIO-ARR, 0 of 11 in VSARR). The BIO-ARR exhibited significantly (p < 0.001) increased helix flow in the AAo as a measure of increased flow derangement. Finally, peak systolic velocities were elevated at the aortic root for BIO-ARR (2.5 vs 2.0m/second, p < 0.05) but lower in the distal AAo when compared with VSARR. CONCLUSIONS: The VSARR results in improved hemodynamic outcomes when compared with BIO-ARR, as indicated by reduced peak velocities in the aortic root and less helix flow in the AAo by 4D flow MRI. Longitudinal research assessing the clinical impact of these differences in hemodynamic outcomes is warranted.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to compare aortic hemodynamics and blood flow patterns using in-vivo four-dimensional (4D) flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients after valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) and aortic root replacement with bioprosthetic valves (BIO-ARR). METHODS: In-vivo 4D flow MRI was performed in 11 patients after VSARR (47 ± 18 years, 6 bicuspid aortic valves, 5 trileaflet aortic valves), 16 patients after BIO-ARR (52 ± 14 years), and 10 healthy controls (47 ± 16 years). Analysis included three-dimensional blood flow visualization and grading of helix flow in the ascending aorta (AAo) and arch. Peak systolic velocity was quantified in 9 analysis planes in the AAo, aortic arch, and descending aorta. Flow profile uniformity was evaluated in the aortic root and ascending aorta. RESULTS: Peak systolic velocity (2.0 to 2.5m/second) in the aortic root and AAo in both VSARR and BIO-ARR were elevated compared with controls (1.1 to 1.3m/second, p < 0.005). Flow asymmetry in BIO-ARR was increased compared with VSARR, evidenced by more AAo outflow jets (9 of 16 BIO-ARR, 0 of 11 in VSARR). The BIO-ARR exhibited significantly (p < 0.001) increased helix flow in the AAo as a measure of increased flow derangement. Finally, peak systolic velocities were elevated at the aortic root for BIO-ARR (2.5 vs 2.0m/second, p < 0.05) but lower in the distal AAo when compared with VSARR. CONCLUSIONS: The VSARR results in improved hemodynamic outcomes when compared with BIO-ARR, as indicated by reduced peak velocities in the aortic root and less helix flow in the AAo by 4D flow MRI. Longitudinal research assessing the clinical impact of these differences in hemodynamic outcomes is warranted.
Authors: Sergey Leontyev; Michael A Borger; Piroze Davierwala; Thomas Walther; Sven Lehmann; Jörg Kempfert; Friedrich W Mohr Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2011-01-31 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Alex J Barker; Michael Markl; Jonas Bürk; Ramona Lorenz; Jelena Bock; Simon Bauer; Jeanette Schulz-Menger; Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-06-22 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Loren F Hiratzka; George L Bakris; Joshua A Beckman; Robert M Bersin; Vincent F Carr; Donald E Casey; Kim A Eagle; Luke K Hermann; Eric M Isselbacher; Ella A Kazerooni; Nicholas T Kouchoukos; Bruce W Lytle; Dianna M Milewicz; David L Reich; Souvik Sen; Julie A Shinn; Lars G Svensson; David M Williams Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-03-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Edouard Semaan; Michael Markl; S Chris Malaisrie; Alex Barker; Bradley Allen; Patrick McCarthy; James C Carr; Jeremy D Collins Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2013-12-06 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Rick A Nishimura; Catherine M Otto; Robert O Bonow; Blase A Carabello; John P Erwin; Robert A Guyton; Patrick T O'Gara; Carlos E Ruiz; Nikolaos J Skubas; Paul Sorajja; Thoralf M Sundt; James D Thomas Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2014-03-03 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Michael D Hope; Thomas A Hope; Alison K Meadows; Karen G Ordovas; Thomas H Urbania; Marcus T Alley; Charles B Higgins Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Eric J Keller; S Chris Malaisrie; Jane Kruse; Patrick M McCarthy; James C Carr; Michael Markl; Alex J Barker; Jeremy D Collins Journal: Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg Date: 2016-05-30
Authors: Nicola Galea; Filippo Piatti; Christopher Lau; Francesco Sturla; Luca Weltert; Iacopo Carbone; Ruggero De Paulis; Mario Gaudino; Leonard N Girardi Journal: J Vis Surg Date: 2018-05-09
Authors: Malenka M Bissell; Margaret Loudon; Aaron T Hess; Victoria Stoll; Elizabeth Orchard; Stefan Neubauer; Saul G Myerson Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2018-02-08 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: M Kelm; L Goubergrits; J Bruening; P Yevtushenko; J F Fernandes; S H Sündermann; F Berger; V Falk; T Kuehne; S Nordmeyer Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-08-29 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Lucia Cocomello; Marco Meloni; Filippo Rapetto; Mai Baquedano; Maria Victoria Ordoñez; Giovanni Biglino; Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci; Andrew Parry; Serban Stoica; Massimo Caputo Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2019-12-16 Impact factor: 5.501