3D Characterization of the Aortic Valve and Aortic Arch in Bicuspid Aortic Valve Patients.
Aortic stenosis
Aortopathy
Bicuspid aortic valve disease
Vessel segmentation
Journal
Annals of biomedical engineering
ISSN: 1573-9686
Titre abrégé: Ann Biomed Eng
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0361512
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 May 2024
11 May 2024
Historique:
received:
13
02
2024
accepted:
29
04
2024
medline:
12
5
2024
pubmed:
12
5
2024
entrez:
11
5
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) commonly have associated aortic stenosis and aortopathy. The geometry of the aortic arch and BAV is not well defined quantitatively, which makes clinical classifications subjective or reliant on limited 2D measurements. The goal of this study was to characterize the 3D geometry of the aortic arch and BAV using objective and quantitative techniques. Pre-TAVR computed tomography angiogram (CTA) in patients with BAV and aortic stenosis (AS) were analyzed (n = 59) by assessing valve commissural angle, presence of a fused region, percent of fusion, and calcium volume. The ascending aorta and aortic arch were reconstructed from patient-specific imaging segmentation to generate a centerline and calculate maximum curvature and maximum area change for the ascending aorta and the descending aorta. Aortic valve commissural angle signified a bimodal distribution suggesting tricuspid-like (≤ 150°, 52.5% of patients) and bicuspid-like (> 150°, 47.5%) morphologies. Tricuspid like was further classified by partial (10.2%) or full (42.4%) fusion, and bicuspid like was further classified into valves with fused region (27.1%) or no fused region (20.3%). Qualitatively, the aortic arch was found to have complex patient-specific variations in its 3D shape with some showing extreme diameter changes and kinks. Quantitatively, subgroups were established using maximum curvature threshold of 0.04 and maximum area change of 30% independently for the ascending and descending aorta. These findings provide insight into the geometric structure of the aortic valve and aortic arch in patients presenting with BAV and AS where 3D characterization allows for quantitative classification of these complex anatomic structures.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38734846
doi: 10.1007/s10439-024-03527-8
pii: 10.1007/s10439-024-03527-8
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Biomedical Engineering Society.
Références
Siu, S. C., and C. K. Silversides. Bicuspid aortic valve disease. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 55(25):2789–2800, 2010.
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.12.068
pubmed: 20579534
Verma, S., and S. C. Siu. Aortic dilatation in patients with bicuspid aortic valve. N Engl J Med. 370:1920–1929, 2014.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1207059
pubmed: 24827036
Carabello, B. A., and W. J. Paulus. Aortic stenosis. The Lancet. 373(9667):956–966, 2009.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60211-7
Lindman, B. R., et al. Calcific aortic stenosis. Nature reviews Disease primers. 2(1):1–28, 2016.
doi: 10.1038/nrdp.2016.6
Yang, L.-T., et al., Aortic Stenosis Progression, Cardiac Damage, and Survival: Comparison Between Bicuspid and Tricuspid Aortic Valves. JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging %@ 1936-878X, 2021.
Blanke, P., et al. Computed tomography imaging in the context of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)/transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) an expert consensus document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging. 12(1):1–24, 2019.
pubmed: 30621986
Bax, J. J., et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: role of multimodality imaging in common and complex clinical scenarios. Cardiovascular Imaging. 13(1_Part):124–139, 2020.
pubmed: 31103575
Burzotta, F., et al. Clinical and procedural impact of aortic arch anatomic variants in carotid stenting procedures. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 86(3):480–489, 2015.
doi: 10.1002/ccd.25947
pubmed: 25846903
Shen, S., et al. Effect of aortic arch type on technical indicators in patients undergoing carotid artery stenting. Journal of International Medical Research. 47(2):682–688, 2019.
doi: 10.1177/0300060518807604
pubmed: 30378455
Frydrychowicz, A., et al. Interdependencies of aortic arch secondary flow patterns, geometry, and age analysed by 4-dimensional phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging at 3 Tesla. European Radiology. 22(5):1122–1130, 2012.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2353-6
pubmed: 22207269
Grabenwöger, M., et al. Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) for the treatment of aortic diseases: a position statement from the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), in collaboration with the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). European Heart Journal. 33(13):1558–1563, 2012.
doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs074
pubmed: 22561257
Abramowitz, Y., et al. Aortic angulation attenuates procedural success following self-expandable but not balloon-expandable TAVR. JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging. 9(8):964–972, 2016.
pubmed: 27424244
O’Flynn, P. M., G. O’Sullivan, and A. S. Pandit. Methods for three-dimensional geometric characterization of the arterial vasculature. Annals of Biomedical Engineering. 35(8):1368–1381, 2007.
doi: 10.1007/s10439-007-9307-9
pubmed: 17431787
Müller-Eschner, M., et al. Accuracy and variability of semiautomatic centerline analysis versus manual aortic measurement techniques for TEVAR. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. 45(3):241–247, 2013.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2012.12.003
pubmed: 23318135
Suh, G.-Y., et al. Aortic arch vessel geometries and deformations in patients with thoracic aortic aneurysms and dissections. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology. 25(12):1903–1911, 2014.
doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2014.06.012
pubmed: 25066591
Chiu, P., et al. Anatomical characteristics of the thoracic aortic arch in an Asian population. Asian Cardiovascular and Thoracic Annals. 21(2):151–159, 2013.
doi: 10.1177/0218492312449637
pubmed: 24532612
Alhafez, B. A., et al. Aortic arch tortuosity, a novel biomarker for thoracic aortic disease, is increased in adults with bicuspid aortic valve. International Journal of Cardiology. 284:84–89, 2019.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.10.052
pubmed: 30366853
Kilner, P. J., et al. Helical and retrograde secondary flow patterns in the aortic arch studied by three-directional magnetic resonance velocity mapping. Circulation. 88(5):2235–2247, 1993.
doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.88.5.2235
pubmed: 8222118
Hatoum, H., B. L. Moore, and L. P. Dasi. On the significance of systolic flow waveform on aortic valve energy loss. Annals of Biomedical Engineering. 46(12):2102–2111, 2018.
doi: 10.1007/s10439-018-2102-y
pubmed: 30030772
pmcid: 6249097
Michelena, H. I., et al. International consensus statement on nomenclature and classification of the congenital bicuspid aortic valve and its aortopathy, for clinical, surgical, interventional and research purposes. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. 60(3):448–476, 2021.
doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezab038
pubmed: 34293102
Sievers, H.-H., and C. Schmidtke. A classification system for the bicuspid aortic valve from 304 surgical specimens. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 133(5):1226–1233, 2007.
doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.01.039
pubmed: 17467434
Jackson, P. R., G. T. Tucker, and H. F. Woods. Testing for bimodality in frequency distributions of data suggesting polymorphisms of drug metabolism-histograms and probit plots. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 28(6):647–653, 1989.
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1989.tb03557.x
pubmed: 2611087
pmcid: 1380035
Jilaihawi, H., et al. A bicuspid aortic valve imaging classification for the TAVR era. JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging. 9(10):1145–1158, 2016.
pubmed: 27372022
Yoon, S.-H., et al. Bicuspid aortic valve morphology and outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 76(9):1018–1030, 2020.
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.07.005
pubmed: 32854836
Fukui, M., et al. Deformation of transcatheter aortic valve prostheses: implications for hypoattenuating leaflet thickening and clinical outcomes. Circulation. 146(6):480–493, 2022.
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.058339
pubmed: 35862182
Gunning, P. S., et al. An in vitro evaluation of the impact of eccentric deployment on transcatheter aortic valve hemodynamics. Annals of Biomedical Engineering. 42(6):1195–1206, 2014.
doi: 10.1007/s10439-014-1008-6
pubmed: 24719050
Bettinger, N., et al. Practical determination of aortic valve calcium volume score on contrast-enhanced computed tomography prior to transcatheter aortic valve replacement and impact on paravalvular regurgitation: elucidating optimal threshold cutoffs. Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. 11(4):302–308, 2017.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2017.04.009
pubmed: 28457950