A parametric study on pulse duplicator design and valve hemodynamics.
aortic valve
bioprosthetic valve
hemodynamic settings
mechanical valve
polymeric valve
pulse duplicator
valve characterization
Journal
Artificial organs
ISSN: 1525-1594
Titre abrégé: Artif Organs
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7802778
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 Apr 2024
23 Apr 2024
Historique:
revised:
01
02
2024
received:
30
10
2023
accepted:
04
04
2024
medline:
23
4
2024
pubmed:
23
4
2024
entrez:
23
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
In vitro assessment is mandatory for artificial heart valve development. This study aims to investigate the effects of pulse duplicator features on valve responsiveness, conduct a sensitivity analysis across valve prosthesis types, and contribute on the development of versatile pulse duplicator systems able to perform reliable prosthetic aortic valve assessment under physiologic hemodynamic conditions. A reference pulse duplicator was established based on literature. Further optimization process led to new designs that underwent a parametric study, also involving different aortic valve prostheses. These designs were evaluated on criteria such as mean pressure differential and pulse pressure (assessed from high-fidelity pressure measurements), valve opening and closing behavior, flow, and regurgitation. Finally, the resulting optimized setup was tested under five different hemodynamic settings simulating a range of physiologic and pathologic conditions. The results show that both, pulse duplicator design and valve type significantly influence aortic and ventricular pressure, flow, and valve kinematic response. The optimal design comprised key features such as a compliance chamber and restrictor for diastolic pressure maintenance and narrow pulse pressure. Additionally, an atrial reservoir was included to prevent atrial-aortic interference, and a bioprosthetic valve was used in mitral position to avoid delayed valve closing effects. This study showed that individual pulse duplicator features can have a significant effect on valve's responsiveness. The optimized versatile pulse duplicator replicated physiologic and pathologic aortic valve hemodynamic conditions, serving as a reliable characterization tool for assessing and optimizing aortic valve performance.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In vitro assessment is mandatory for artificial heart valve development. This study aims to investigate the effects of pulse duplicator features on valve responsiveness, conduct a sensitivity analysis across valve prosthesis types, and contribute on the development of versatile pulse duplicator systems able to perform reliable prosthetic aortic valve assessment under physiologic hemodynamic conditions.
METHODS
METHODS
A reference pulse duplicator was established based on literature. Further optimization process led to new designs that underwent a parametric study, also involving different aortic valve prostheses. These designs were evaluated on criteria such as mean pressure differential and pulse pressure (assessed from high-fidelity pressure measurements), valve opening and closing behavior, flow, and regurgitation. Finally, the resulting optimized setup was tested under five different hemodynamic settings simulating a range of physiologic and pathologic conditions.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The results show that both, pulse duplicator design and valve type significantly influence aortic and ventricular pressure, flow, and valve kinematic response. The optimal design comprised key features such as a compliance chamber and restrictor for diastolic pressure maintenance and narrow pulse pressure. Additionally, an atrial reservoir was included to prevent atrial-aortic interference, and a bioprosthetic valve was used in mitral position to avoid delayed valve closing effects.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study showed that individual pulse duplicator features can have a significant effect on valve's responsiveness. The optimized versatile pulse duplicator replicated physiologic and pathologic aortic valve hemodynamic conditions, serving as a reliable characterization tool for assessing and optimizing aortic valve performance.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Zurich Heart, Hochschulmedizin Zürich, Switzerland
Organisme : ETH Zürich, Switzerland
Organisme : ETHeart, Open ETH, ETH Board, Switzerland
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Authors. Artificial Organs published by International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Marom G, Einav S. New insights into valve hemodynamics. Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2020;11:e0014.
Zilla P, Brink J, Human P, Bezuidenhout D. Prosthetic heart valves: catering for the few. Biomaterials. 2008;29:385–406.
Butany J, Collins MJ. Analysis of prosthetic cardiac devices: a guide for the practising pathologist. J Clin Pathol. 2005;58:113–124.
Li KYC. Bioprosthetic heart valves: upgrading a 50‐year old technology. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2019;6:47.
Azadani AN. In vitro experimental methods for assessment of prosthetic heart valves. Principles of heart valve engineering. Elsevier; London, UK, 2019. p. 213–238.
Lanzarone E, Vismara R, Fiore GB. A new pulsatile volumetric device with biomorphic valves for the in vitro study of the cardiovascular system. Artif Organs. 2009;33:1048–1062.
Jahren SE, Heinisch PP, Wirz J, Winkler BM, Carrel T, Obrist D. Hemodynamic performance of Edwards Intuity valve in a compliant aortic root model. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2015;2015:3315–3318.
Feng W, Yang X, Liu Y, Fan Y. An in vitro feasibility study of the influence of configurations and leaflet thickness on the hydrodynamics of deformed transcatheter aortic valve. Artif Organs. 2017;41:735–743.
Morisawa D, Falahatpisheh A, Avenatti E, Little SH, Kheradvar A. Intraventricular vortex interaction between transmitral flow and paravalvular leak. Sci Rep. 2018;8:15657.
Rodriguez RA, Dellimore KH, Müller JH. Evaluating the performance of cardiac pulse duplicators through the concept of fidelity. Cardiovasc Eng Technol. 2019;10:423–436.
Leo HL, Dasi LP, Carberry J, Simon HA, Yoganathan AP. Fluid dynamic assessment of three polymeric heart valves using particle image velocimetry. Ann Biomed Eng. 2006;34:936–952.
De Paulis R, Schmitz C, Scaffa R, Nardi P, Chiariello L, Reul H. In vitro evaluation of aortic valve prosthesis in a novel valved conduit with pseudosinuses of Valsalva. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;130:1016–1021.
Singh R, Vanauker M, Joseph B, Ondrovic L, Strom JA, editors. Quantifying the effect of aortic valve degradation using signal processing techniques. 2005.
Adathala R, Mohan A, Charuvila M, Vayalappil MC, editors. A virtual instrumentation system for pulsatile testing of artificial heart valves. 2010.
Fredrick Cornhill J. An aortic‐left ventricular pulse duplicator used in testing prosthetic aortic heart valves. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1977;73:550–558.
Duran CG, Gunning AJ, McMilian T. A simple versatile pulse duplicator. Thorax. 1964;19:503–506.
Vennemann B, Rösgen T, Heinisch PP, Obrist D. Leaflet kinematics of mechanical and bioprosthetic aortic valve prostheses. ASAIO J. 2018;64:651–661.
International Organization for Standardization 5840–3. Cardiovascular implants – Cardiac valve prostheses. 2021.
Wu C, Saikrishnan N, Chalekian AJ, Fraser R, Ieropoli O, Retta SM, et al. In‐vitro pulsatile flow testing of prosthetic heart valves: a round‐robin study by the ISO cardiac valves working group. Cardiovasc Eng Technol. 2019;10:397–422.
Toner G. Development of a left heart simulator for prosthetic valve evaluation. Master thesis. Drexel University; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 2017.
Bloodworth CH, Pierce EL, Easley TF, Drach A, Khalighi AH, Toma M, et al. Ex vivo methods for informing computational models of the mitral valve. Ann Biomed Eng. 2017;45:496–507.
Rajeev A, Mohan A, Charuvila MV, Vayalappil MC, editors. A virtual instrumentation system for pulsatile testing of artificial heart valves. 2010.
Jahren SE, Winkler BM, Heinisch PP, Wirz J, Carrel T, Obrist D. Aortic root stiffness affects the kinematics of bioprosthetic aortic valves. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2017;24:173–180.
Stenemo. CC BY‐SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by‐sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons. Diagram of the human heart (no labels), https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diagram_of_the_human_heart_(no_labels).svg.
Silverthorn DU, Johnson BR, Ober WC, Ober CE, Impaglizzo A, Silverthorn AC. Human physiology: an integrated approach/Dee Unglaub Silverthorn. Global ed. Harlow: Pearson; 2019.
Miller‐Hance WC, Gertler R. 16 – Essentials of cardiology. 6th ed. Elsevier; Philadelphia, PA, 2019.
Swanson M, Clark RE. Dimensions and geometric relationships of the human aortic valve as a function of pressure. Circ Res. 1974;35:871–882.
Leat ME, Fisher J. A synthetic leaflet heart valve with improved opening characteristics. Med Eng Phys. 1994;16:470–476.
Fisher J. Artificial heart valve. 1996.
Davis K, Muller JH, Meyer CJ, Smit FE. Evaluating the impact of air compliance chamber volumes on valve performance for three different heart valves. 2018 3rd biennial south African biomedical engineering conference (SAIBMEC). Stellenbosch, IEEE 2018, p. 1–4.
O'Rourke MF, Hashimoto J. Mechanical factors in arterial aging: a clinical perspective. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:1–13.
Carrel T, Dembitsky WP, de Mol B, Obrist D, Dreyfus G, Meuris B, et al. Non‐physiologic closing of bi‐leaflet mechanical heart prostheses requires a new tri‐leaflet valve design. Int J Cardiol. 2020;304:125–127.
Saugel B, Kouz K, Scheeren TWL, Greiwe G, Hoppe P, Romagnoli S, et al. Cardiac output estimation using pulse wave analysis‐physiology, algorithms, and technologies: a narrative review. Br J Anaesth. 2021;126:67–76.
Marquez J, McCurry K, Severyn DA, Pinsky MR. Ability of pulse power, esophageal doppler, and arterial pulse pressure to estimate rapid changes in stroke volume in humans. Crit Care Med. 2008;36:3001–3007.
Tango AM, Salmonsmith J, Ducci A, Burriesci G. Validation and extension of a fluid‐structure interaction model of the healthy aortic valve. Cardiovasc Eng Technol. 2018;9:739–751.
Sabbah HN, Anbe DT, Stein PD. Negative intraventricular diastolic pressure in patients with mitral stenosis: Evidence of left ventricular diastolic suction. The American Journal of Cardiology 1980;45:562–66.
Durand LG, Garcia D, Sakr F, Sava H, Cimon R, Pibarot P. A new flow model for Doppler ultrasound study of prosthetic heart valves. J Heart Valve Dis 1999; 8:85–95.
Ahmad Bakir A, Al Abed A, Stevens MC, Lovell NH, Dokos S. A Multiphysics Biventricular Cardiac Model: Simulations With a Left‐Ventricular Assist Device. Front Physiol 2018; 9:1259.
Choi HF, D‘hooge J, Rademakers FE, Claus P. Influence of left‐ventricular shape on passive filling properties and end‐diastolic fiber stress and strain. J Biomech 2010;43:1745–53.
Pohl M, Wendt MO, Werner S, Koch B, Lerche D. In vitro testing of artificial heart valves: comparison between Newtonian and non‐Newtonian fluids. Artif Organs 1996;20:37–46.