| Literature DB >> 35403058 |
Matthew H Park1,2, Mateo Marin-Cuartas1,3, Annabel M Imbrie-Moore1,2, Robert J Wilkerson1, Pearly K Pandya1,2, Yuanjia Zhu1,4, Hanjay Wang1, Michael A Borger3, Y Joseph Woo1,4.
Abstract
Objective: Neochordal implantation is a common form of surgical mitral valve (MV) repair. However, neochord length is assessed using static left ventricular pressurization, leading surgeons to evaluate leaflet coaptation and valve competency when the left ventricle is dilating instead of contracting physiologically, referred to as diastolic phase inversion (DPI). We hypothesize that the difference in papillary muscle (PM) positioning between DPI and physiologic systole results in miscalculated neochord lengths, which might affect repair performance.Entities:
Keywords: CT, computed tomography; DPI, diastolic phase inversion; FBG, Fiber Bragg Grating; IPM, image-guided papillary muscle; LV, left ventricle; MR, mitral regurgitation; MV, mitral valve; PM, papillary muscle; cardiac biomechanics; diastolic phase inversion; e-PTFE, expanded polytetrafluoroethylene; mitral valve; neochordal repair; robotic simulation; static pressurization assessment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35403058 PMCID: PMC8987390 DOI: 10.1016/j.xjtc.2022.01.009
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JTCVS Tech ISSN: 2666-2507
Figure 1Labeled illustration of mitral valve neochordal repair with static pressurization for post-repair assessment and diastolic phase inversion (DPI). We hypothesize that DPI results in neochord length overestimation, which might lead to a suboptimal repair and reduced hemodynamic performance.
Figure 2The study's methods, results, and implications. Experimental design to test the effects of diastolic phase inversion (DPI) of left ventricular geometry after static pressurization for assessment of post-repair mitral valve (MV) competency. Explanted porcine MVs were mounted in our robotic ex vivo simulator with implanted chordal strain gauges (n = 6). Four paired experiments were tested on each valve in the simulator: baseline control, prolapse, DPI repair, and physiologic repair. TEE, Transesophageal echocardiography; FBG, Fiber Bragg Grating; MR, mitral regurgitation.
Figure 3Heart simulator experimental setup, from Imbrie-Moore. A, Picture of the image-guided papillary muscle robotic system sewn to papillary muscles of a porcine mitral valve to mimic the motion of the heart. B, Diagram of the custom left heart simulator with stationary papillary muscles during ex vivo cardiac simulation experiments. C, High-resolution Fiber Bragg Grating strain gauge sensor instrumenting a chordae tendineae; the sensor is calibrated to correlate strain to force. The chord is severed between the 2 suture attachment points, denoted by red arrows, to transmit all force through the sensor.
Figure 4A, Mean flow tracings for baseline, prolapse, diastolic phase inversion (DPI) repair, and physiologic repair. Flow tracings show successful induction of mitral regurgitation for the prolapse condition followed by restoration of flow dynamics for both repairs. B, Mean pressure tracings for all experimental conditions. Pressure data shows a reduction in pressures for the prolapse condition, indicating successful induction of mitral regurgitation, followed by a return to normal pressures for both repair conditions. Shaded regions for both panels represent standard error.
Figure 5A, Mean force tracings for primary and secondary chordae in diastolic phase inversion (DPI) and physiologic repair conditions. A Fiber Bragg Grating sensor was used in each case to measure real-time native chordae forces. Shaded regions represent standard error. On average, the physiologic repair resulted in lower chordal forces than those of DPI repair, with peak force data additionally reflecting that reduction. B, Box plot of combined primary and secondary peak chordal forces for the DPI and physiologic repairs. The upper and lower borders of the box represent the upper and lower quartiles, the middle horizontal line represents the median, and the upper and lower whiskers represent the maximum and minimum values. Lines between points represent paired data. The peak forces were lower (P < .01) for the physiologic repair (0.57 ± 0.11 N) compared with the DPI repair (0.68 ± 0.12 N).
Hemodynamic, chordal force, and neochord length data
| Baseline | Prolapse | DPI repair | Physiologic repair | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pressure | ||||
| Transmitral mean back pressure, mm Hg | 99.386 | 74.731 | 99.053 | 98.806 |
| Mitral positive pressure time, s | 0.432 | 0.465 | 0.411 | 0.446 |
| Atrial RMS pressure, mm Hg | 15.496 | 14.168 | 14.709 | 15.422 |
| Atrial maximum pressure, mm Hg | 46.886 | 40.709 | 44.614 | 45.740 |
| Ventricular RMS pressure, mm Hg | 65.586 | 57.465 | 65.385 | 66.109 |
| Ventricular maximum pressure, mm Hg | 121.352 | 113.108 | 123.286 | 123.460 |
| Flow | ||||
| Heart rate, bpm | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 |
| Pump stroke volume, mL | 110.055 | 110.011 | 109.961 | 110.056 |
| Systolic time, s | 0.300 | 0.300 | 0.300 | 0.300 |
| Systolic percent of cycle | 34.961 | 35.007 | 34.974 | 34.961 |
| Mitral forward flow time, s | 0.524 | 0.518 | 0.520 | 0.527 |
| Mitral cardiac output, L/min | 5.408 | 4.225 | 5.337 | 5.524 |
| Mitral forward volume, mL | 85.051 | 88.983 | 87.798 | 88.760 |
| Mitral closing volume, mL | −6.671 | −10.233 | −7.994 | −7.757 |
| Mitral leakage volume, mL | −1.119 | −18.392 | −3.567 | −2.110 |
| Mitral leakage rate, mL/s | −4.100 | −68.790 | −12.820 | −7.764 |
| Mitral mean flow, mL/s | 161.431 | 171.006 | 167.645 | 167.391 |
| Mitral RMS flow, mL/s | 215.181 | 231.191 | 226.761 | 225.290 |
| Mitral peak flow, mL/s | 571.336 | 594.178 | 600.392 | 600.127 |
| Mitral regurge fraction, % | 9.014 | 31.158 | 13.335 | 11.087 |
| Energy | ||||
| Ventricular energy (VE), mJ | 990.308 | 927.776 | 998.139 | 992.598 |
| Transmitral closing energy loss, mJ | 17.698 | 44.786 | 30.275 | 29.586 |
| Transmitral closing energy loss, % VE | 1.795 | 4.904 | 3.013 | 2.973 |
| Transmitral leakage energy loss, mJ | 16.032 | 200.185 | 46.967 | 29.565 |
| Transmitral leakage energy loss, % VE | 1.630 | 21.873 | 4.714 | 2.974 |
| Transmitral total energy loss, mJ | 40.067 | 278.372 | 100.413 | 87.072 |
| Transmitral total energy loss, % VE | 3.972 | 30.521 | 9.928 | 8.652 |
| Chordal data | ||||
| Neochord length, mm | N/A | N/A | 16.42 | 14.22 |
| Primary and secondary chordal forces, N | 0.662 | 0.549 | 0.681 | 0.568 |
All information is presented as averaged across all 6 paired experiments. DPI, Diastolic phase inversion; RMS, root mean square; bpm, beats per minute; VE, ventricular energy.