Literature DB >> 32804291

Patient-Specific Bicuspid Aortic Valve Biomechanics: A Magnetic Resonance Imaging Integrated Fluid-Structure Interaction Approach.

Monica Emendi1,2, Francesco Sturla3, Ram P Ghosh2, Matteo Bianchi2, Filippo Piatti3, Francesca R Pluchinotta1,4,5, Daniel Giese6, Massimo Lombardi4, Alberto Redaelli1, Danny Bluestein7.   

Abstract

Congenital bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) consists of two fused cusps and represents a major risk factor for calcific valvular stenosis. Herein, a fully coupled fluid-structure interaction (FSI) BAV model was developed from patient-specific magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and compared against in vivo 4-dimensional flow MRI (4D Flow). FSI simulation compared well with 4D Flow, confirming direction and magnitude of the flow jet impinging onto the aortic wall as well as location and extension of secondary flows and vortices developing at systole: the systolic flow jet originating from an elliptical 1.6 cm2 orifice reached a peak velocity of 252.2 cm/s, 0.6% lower than 4D Flow, progressively impinging on the ascending aorta convexity. The FSI model predicted a peak flow rate of 22.4 L/min, 6.7% higher than 4D Flow, and provided BAV leaflets mechanical and flow-induced shear stresses, not directly attainable from MRI. At systole, the ventricular side of the non-fused leaflet revealed the highest wall shear stress (WSS) average magnitude, up to 14.6 Pa along the free margin, with WSS progressively decreasing towards the belly. During diastole, the aortic side of the fused leaflet exhibited the highest diastolic maximum principal stress, up to 322 kPa within the attachment region. Systematic comparison with ground-truth non-invasive MRI can improve the computational model ability to reproduce native BAV hemodynamics and biomechanical response more realistically, and shed light on their role in BAV patients' risk for developing complications; this approach may further contribute to the validation of advanced FSI simulations designed to assess BAV biomechanics.

Entities:  

Keywords:  4D flow; Bicuspid aortic valve; Fluid–structure interaction; Magnetic resonance imaging; Patient-specific model

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32804291      PMCID: PMC7990108          DOI: 10.1007/s10439-020-02571-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng        ISSN: 0090-6964            Impact factor:   3.934


  50 in total

1.  Coronary Flow Impacts Aortic Leaflet Mechanics and Aortic Sinus Hemodynamics.

Authors:  Brandon L Moore; Lakshmi Prasad Dasi
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2015-01-31       Impact factor: 3.934

2.  Computational comparison of regional stress and deformation characteristics in tricuspid and bicuspid aortic valve leaflets.

Authors:  K Cao; P Sucosky
Journal:  Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng       Date:  2016-06-24       Impact factor: 2.747

Review 3.  Potential drug targets for calcific aortic valve disease.

Authors:  Joshua D Hutcheson; Elena Aikawa; W David Merryman
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 32.419

4.  Numerical evaluation of transcatheter aortic valve performance during heart beating and its post-deployment fluid-structure interaction analysis.

Authors:  Ram P Ghosh; Gil Marom; Matteo Bianchi; Karl D'souza; Wojtek Zietak; Danny Bluestein
Journal:  Biomech Model Mechanobiol       Date:  2020-02-24

5.  Lumen diameter of normal human coronary arteries. Influence of age, sex, anatomic variation, and left ventricular hypertrophy or dilation.

Authors:  J T Dodge; B G Brown; E L Bolson; H T Dodge
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  An inverse modeling approach for semilunar heart valve leaflet mechanics: exploitation of tissue structure.

Authors:  Ankush Aggarwal; Michael S Sacks
Journal:  Biomech Model Mechanobiol       Date:  2015-10-08

7.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance evaluation of aortic stenosis severity using single plane measurement of effective orifice area.

Authors:  Julio Garcia; Oscar R Marrufo; Alfredo O Rodriguez; Eric Larose; Philippe Pibarot; Lyes Kadem
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2012-04-06       Impact factor: 5.364

8.  Validation of numerical simulation methods in aortic arch using 4D Flow MRI.

Authors:  Shohei Miyazaki; Keiichi Itatani; Toyoki Furusawa; Teruyasu Nishino; Masataka Sugiyama; Yasuo Takehara; Satoshi Yasukochi
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 2.037

9.  Valve-Related Hemodynamics Mediate Human Bicuspid Aortopathy: Insights From Wall Shear Stress Mapping.

Authors:  David G Guzzardi; Alex J Barker; Pim van Ooij; S Chris Malaisrie; Jyothy J Puthumana; Darrell D Belke; Holly E M Mewhort; Daniyil A Svystonyuk; Sean Kang; Subodh Verma; Jeremy Collins; James Carr; Robert O Bonow; Michael Markl; James D Thomas; Patrick M McCarthy; Paul W M Fedak
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2015-08-25       Impact factor: 24.094

10.  Ex vivo evidence for the contribution of hemodynamic shear stress abnormalities to the early pathogenesis of calcific bicuspid aortic valve disease.

Authors:  Ling Sun; Santanu Chandra; Philippe Sucosky
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-10-31       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  8 in total

1.  Validating In Silico and In Vitro Patient-Specific Structural and Flow Models with Transcatheter Bicuspid Aortic Valve Replacement Procedure.

Authors:  Salwa B Anam; Brandon J Kovarovic; Ram P Ghosh; Matteo Bianchi; Ashraf Hamdan; Rami Haj-Ali; Danny Bluestein
Journal:  Cardiovasc Eng Technol       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 2.495

2.  Progressive Calcification in Bicuspid Valves: A Coupled Hemodynamics and Multiscale Structural Computations.

Authors:  Karin Lavon; Adi Morany; Rotem Halevi; Ashraf Hamdan; Ehud Raanani; Danny Bluestein; Rami Haj-Ali
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2021-10-27       Impact factor: 3.934

3.  Controlled Comparison of Simulated Hemodynamics Across Tricuspid and Bicuspid Aortic Valves.

Authors:  Alexander D Kaiser; Rohan Shad; Nicole Schiavone; William Hiesinger; Alison L Marsden
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2022-06-24       Impact factor: 4.219

4.  Designing a Novel Asymmetric Transcatheter Aortic Valve for Stenotic Bicuspid Aortic Valves Using Patient-Specific Computational Modeling.

Authors:  Ryan T Helbock; Salwa B Anam; Brandon J Kovarovic; Marvin J Slepian; Ashraf Hamdan; Rami Haj-Ali; Danny Bluestein
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2022-08-30       Impact factor: 4.219

5.  Assessment of Paravalvular Leak Severity and Thrombogenic Potential in Transcatheter Bicuspid Aortic Valve Replacements Using Patient-Specific Computational Modeling.

Authors:  Salwa B Anam; Brandon J Kovarovic; Ram P Ghosh; Matteo Bianchi; Ashraf Hamdan; Rami Haj-Ali; Danny Bluestein
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Transl Res       Date:  2021-12-02       Impact factor: 3.216

Review 6.  Clinical implications of the biomechanics of bicuspid aortic valve and bicuspid aortopathy.

Authors:  Ali Fatehi Hassanabad; Melissa A King; Elena Di Martino; Paul W M Fedak; Julio Garcia
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-08-12

Review 7.  Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic valve disease: does conventional surgery have a future?

Authors:  Breandan B Yeats; Pradeep K Yadav; Lakshmi P Dasi; Vinod H Thourani
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2022-07

8.  Combining 4D Flow MRI and Complex Networks Theory to Characterize the Hemodynamic Heterogeneity in Dilated and Non-dilated Human Ascending Aortas.

Authors:  Karol Calò; Diego Gallo; Andrea Guala; Jose Rodriguez Palomares; Stefania Scarsoglio; Luca Ridolfi; Umberto Morbiducci
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2021-06-02       Impact factor: 3.934

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.