| Literature DB >> 29911126 |
Jesus Aleman1, Amy Adkins1, Lori Boies1, Fatima Al-Quiati1, Edward Sako2, Shamik Bhattacharya1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Tricuspid annuloplasty rings are commonly used to cinch an enlarged tricuspid annulus back to its original shape and size in patients with severe functional tricuspid regurgitation. However, the invasive operation is contraindicated for patients at risk for reoperation. Fortunately, transcatheter repair procedures, currently in the development process, are minimally invasive alternatives to current repair techniques. This study aims to determine the species-dependence of cinching force with the potential of informing transcatheter repair design by quantifying the minimum required cinching force necessary to reduce tricuspid regurgitation.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiac mechanics; Species comparison; Transcatheter repair; Tricuspid valve
Year: 2017 PMID: 29911126 PMCID: PMC6002154 DOI: 10.4172/2329-9517.1000283
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Dis Diagn ISSN: 2329-9517
Figure 1Image of porcine tricuspid valve. Inward arrows show the direction of cinching. Sept.-Septal valve, Post.-Posterior valve, Ant.-Anterior valve, A-P-anterior posterior axis, S-L septal-lateral axis.
Figure 2Images of porcine tricuspid valve top and ovine tricuspid valve bottom at pulling distance 0 mm, 12 mm, and 24 mm (left to right).
Figure 3Force vs percent area reduction for the pig heart and the sheep heart.
Figure 4Both sheep (A) and porcine (B) septal tissues were analyzed after both phenol treatment and cinching. Overall there are no gross tissue differences that were observed through the use of elastic stain.
Figure 5Both sheep (A) and porcine (B) free wall tissues were analyzed after both phenol treatment and cinching. The cardiac muscle tissue found in the free wall of the porcine specimen (B) was found to be in a less compact arrangement than that of the sheep.
Figure 6All pictures show sections of the septal wall after cinching treatment. Part A is a sheep septal wall after both phenol treatment and cinching. Parts B and C are from porcine samples where B was not treated with phenol and C was prior to cinching. The tissue shows definite integrity issues when comparing non-phenol treated (B) to phenol-treated (C). When comparing the sheep vs porcine tissue (A and B) there does not appear to be an overt difference in the tissue structure.