Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff1, Achudhan Karunaharamoorthy2, Ralf Felix Trauzeddel2, Alex J Barker2, Edyta Blaszczyk2, Michael Markl2, Jeanette Schulz-Menger2. 1. From the Working Group Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Experimental and Clinical Research Center, a Joint Cooperation Between the Charité Medical Faculty and the Max-Delbrueck Center for Molecular Medicine and HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch, Department of Cardiology and Nephrology, Berlin, Germany (F.v.K.-B., A.K., R.F.T., E.B., J.S.-M.); Department of Biomedical Engineering, McCormick School of Engineering, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL (A.J.B., M.M.); and Department of Radiology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL (M.M.). florian.von-knobelsdorff@charite.de. 2. From the Working Group Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Experimental and Clinical Research Center, a Joint Cooperation Between the Charité Medical Faculty and the Max-Delbrueck Center for Molecular Medicine and HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch, Department of Cardiology and Nephrology, Berlin, Germany (F.v.K.-B., A.K., R.F.T., E.B., J.S.-M.); Department of Biomedical Engineering, McCormick School of Engineering, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL (A.J.B., M.M.); and Department of Radiology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL (M.M.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aortic stenosis (AS) leads to variable stress for the left ventricle (LV) and consequently a broad range of LV remodeling. The aim of this study was to describe blood flow patterns in the ascending aorta of patients with AS and determine their association with remodeling. METHODS AND RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients with AS (14 mild, 8 moderate, 15 severe; age, 63±13 years) and 37 healthy controls (age, 60±10 years) underwent 4-dimensional-flow magnetic resonance imaging. Helical and vortical flow formations and flow eccentricity were assessed in the ascending aorta. Normalized flow displacement from the vessel center and peak systolic wall shear stress in the ascending aorta were quantified. LV remodeling was assessed based on LV mass index and the ratio of LV mass:end-diastolic volume (relative wall mass). Marked helical and vortical flow formation and eccentricity were more prevalent in patients with AS than in healthy subjects, and patients with AS exhibited an asymmetrical and elevated distribution of peak systolic wall shear stress. In AS, aortic orifice area was strongly negatively associated with vortical flow formation (P=0.0274), eccentricity (P=0.0070), and flow displacement (P=0.0021). Bicuspid aortic valve was associated with more intense helical (P=0.0098) and vortical flow formation (P=0.0536), higher flow displacement (P=0.11), and higher peak systolic wall shear stress (P=0.0926). LV mass index and relative wall mass were significantly associated with aortic orifice area (P=0.0611, P=0.0058) and flow displacement (P=0.0058, P=0.0283). CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, AS leads to abnormal blood flow pattern and peak systolic wall shear stress in the ascending aorta. In addition to aortic orifice area, normalized flow displacement was significantly associated with LV remodeling.
BACKGROUND:Aortic stenosis (AS) leads to variable stress for the left ventricle (LV) and consequently a broad range of LV remodeling. The aim of this study was to describe blood flow patterns in the ascending aorta of patients with AS and determine their association with remodeling. METHODS AND RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients with AS (14 mild, 8 moderate, 15 severe; age, 63±13 years) and 37 healthy controls (age, 60±10 years) underwent 4-dimensional-flow magnetic resonance imaging. Helical and vortical flow formations and flow eccentricity were assessed in the ascending aorta. Normalized flow displacement from the vessel center and peak systolic wall shear stress in the ascending aorta were quantified. LV remodeling was assessed based on LV mass index and the ratio of LV mass:end-diastolic volume (relative wall mass). Marked helical and vortical flow formation and eccentricity were more prevalent in patients with AS than in healthy subjects, and patients with AS exhibited an asymmetrical and elevated distribution of peak systolic wall shear stress. In AS, aortic orifice area was strongly negatively associated with vortical flow formation (P=0.0274), eccentricity (P=0.0070), and flow displacement (P=0.0021). Bicuspid aortic valve was associated with more intense helical (P=0.0098) and vortical flow formation (P=0.0536), higher flow displacement (P=0.11), and higher peak systolic wall shear stress (P=0.0926). LV mass index and relative wall mass were significantly associated with aortic orifice area (P=0.0611, P=0.0058) and flow displacement (P=0.0058, P=0.0283). CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, AS leads to abnormal blood flow pattern and peak systolic wall shear stress in the ascending aorta. In addition to aortic orifice area, normalized flow displacement was significantly associated with LV remodeling.
Authors: Alex J Barker; Pim van Ooij; Krishna Bandi; Julio Garcia; Mazen Albaghdadi; Patrick McCarthy; Robert O Bonow; James Carr; Jeremy Collins; S Chris Malaisrie; Michael Markl Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-10-02 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff; Ralf F Trauzeddel; Alex J Barker; Henriette Gruettner; Michael Markl; Jeanette Schulz-Menger Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2013-11-25 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Jonas Bürk; Philipp Blanke; Zoran Stankovic; Alex Barker; Maximilian Russe; Julia Geiger; Alex Frydrychowicz; Mathias Langer; Michael Markl Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2012-12-13 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: R Lorenz; J Bock; A J Barker; F von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff; W Wallis; J G Korvink; M M Bissell; J Schulz-Menger; M Markl Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Marc R Dweck; Sanjiv Joshi; Timothy Murigu; Ankur Gulati; Francisco Alpendurada; Andrew Jabbour; Alicia Maceira; Isabelle Roussin; David B Northridge; Philip J Kilner; Stuart A Cook; Nicholas A Boon; John Pepper; Raad H Mohiaddin; David E Newby; Dudley J Pennell; Sanjay K Prasad Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2012-07-28 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Pavlo Yevtushenko; Florian Hellmeier; Jan Bruening; Sarah Nordmeyer; Volkmar Falk; Christoph Knosalla; Marcus Kelm; Titus Kuehne; Leonid Goubergrits Journal: Biophys J Date: 2019-07-22 Impact factor: 4.033
Authors: Julia Geiger; Amir A Rahsepar; Kenichiro Suwa; Alex Powell; Ahmadreza Ghasemiesfe; Alex J Barker; Jeremy D Collins; James C Carr; Michael Markl Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-12-05 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Nesreen Z Alsmadi; Sarah J Shapiro; Christopher S Lewis; Vinit M Sheth; Trevor A Snyder; David W Schmidtke Journal: Biomicrofluidics Date: 2017-11-28 Impact factor: 2.800
Authors: Heather A Stefek; Haben Berhane; Joshua D Robinson; Brian Reilly; Alexander Ruh; Michael Markl; Cynthia K Rigsby Journal: Pediatr Cardiol Date: 2019-07-24 Impact factor: 1.655
Authors: Kenichiro Suwa; Ozair Abdul Rahman; Emilie Bollache; Michael J Rose; Amir Ali Rahsepar; James C Carr; Jeremy D Collins; Alex J Barker; Michael Markl Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-06-06 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Julio Garcia; Roel L F van der Palen; Emilie Bollache; Kelly Jarvis; Michael J Rose; Alex J Barker; Jeremy D Collins; James C Carr; Joshua Robinson; Cynthia K Rigsby; Michael Markl Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-05-26 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Emilie Bollache; Kristopher D Knott; Kelly Jarvis; Redha Boubertakh; Ryan Scott Dolan; Claudia Camaioni; Louise Collins; Paul Scully; Sydney Rabin; Thomas Treibel; James C Carr; Pim van Ooij; Jeremy D Collins; Julia Geiger; James C Moon; Alex J Barker; Steffen E Petersen; Michael Markl Journal: Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging Date: 2019-06-27