The purpose of this study is to determine why sutureless aortic bioprostheses apparently offer better haemodynamic properties compared to sewed-in aortic bioprostheses in patients who underwent aortic valve replacement. Our approach to address this question is the combination of clinical data with the application of specifically validated experimental and computer based analyses to compare the performance of these valves under patient-specific conditions.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
20
ECG gated CT angiography of the heart will be performed on a 128-slice dual-source and two Stellar detectors CT system with retrospective ECG-gating (Siemens/SOMATOM Definition Flash - Siemens, Germany, 100kV, 395.75 mAs). In details, multi-phase images will be acquired to reconstruct between 10 and 100% of the cardiac cycle (10% increments) with a slice thickness of 1 mm. Examination will include left ventricular outflow tract, aortic root, coronary sinus, ascending aorta together with the prosthetic valves.
Medical University of Vienna
Vienna, Austria
RECRUITINGComparison of maximum and minimum velocity under patient specific conditions
Time frame: between 6 months and 4 years after aortic valve replacement
Comparison of the effective orifice area under patient specific conditions
Time frame: between 6 months and 4 years after aortic valve replacement
Comparison of the percentage of turbulent flow under patient specific conditions
Time frame: between 6 months and 4 years after aortic valve replacement
Comparison of the pressure drop under patient specific conditions
Time frame: between 6 months and 4 years after aortic valve replacement
Patient-specific, computer simulated pressure gradients compared to echocardiographically obtained pressure gradients.
The first secondary outcome measure is the comparison of -pressure gradients as computed by the model against the same data collected standardly with echocardiographic technique. Differences will be quantified. If positive (\< 10%), this assessment would enhance the use of patient-specific models in clinics as a predictive tool for detailed haemodynamics."
Time frame: between 6 months and 4 years after aortic valve replacement
Patient-specific, computer simulated peak velocity compared to echocardiographically obtained peak velocity.
The second secondary outcome measure is the comparison of -peak velocity as computed by the model against the same data collected standardly with echocardiographic technique. Differences will be quantified. If positive (\< 10%), this assessment would enhance the use of patient-specific models in clinics as a predictive tool for detailed haemodynamics."
Time frame: between 6 months and 4 years after aortic valve replacement
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.