Pressure gradients across bileaflet aortic valves by direct measurement and echocardiography

Annals of Thoracic Surgery

Volumn 61, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 48-57

  Laske, Andreas ^a   Jenni, Rolf ^b   Maloigne, Michel ^b   Vassalli, Giuseppe ^b   Bertel, Osmund ^b   Turina, Marko I ^b  

^a HerzZentrum Hirslanden Zurich   (Switzerland)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AORTA VALVE DISEASE; AORTA VALVE REGURGITATION; AORTA VALVE REPLACEMENT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEASUREMENT; PRESSURE GRADIENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 0030019453     PISSN: 00034975     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/0003-4975(95)00922-1     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Baumgartner H, Khan S, DeRobertis M, Czer L, Maurer G. Discrepancies between Doppler and catheter gradients in aortic prosthetic valves in vitro. Circulation 1990;82:1467-75.
2. Emery RW, Nicoloff DM. St. Jude Medical cardiac valve prosthesis: in vitro studies. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1979; 78:269-76.
3. Yoganathan AP, Chaux A, Gray RJ, et al. Bileaflet, tilting disc and porcine aortic valve substitutes: in-vitro hydrodynamic characteristics. J Am Coll Cardiol 1984;3:313-20.
4. Fisher J, Wheatley DJ. Hydrodynamic function of ten prosthetic heart valves in the aortic position. Clin Phys Physiol Meas 1988;9:307-17.
5. Johnston RT, Weerasena NA, Butterfield M, Fisher J, Spyt TJ. Carbomedics and St. Jude Medical bileaflet valves: an in vitro and in vivo comparison. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1992;6:267-71.
6. Chandran KB, Schoephoerster R, Fatemi R, Dove EL. An in vitro experimental comparison of Edwards-Duromedics and St. Jude bileaflet heart valve prostheses. Clin Phys Physiol Meas 1988;9:233-41.
7. Reul H, van Son JA, Steinseifer U, et al. In vitro comparison of bileaflet aortic valve prostheses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1993;106:412-20.
8. Knott E, Reul H, Knoch M, Rau G. In vitro comparison of aortic heart valve prostheses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1988;96:952-61.
9. Arom KV, Nicoloff DM, Kersten TE, Northrup WF, Lindsay WG, Emery RW. Ten year's experience with the St. Jude Medical valve prosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 1989;47:831-7.
10. Schneider K, Hofer M, Siebenmann R, et al. Aortic mitral and multiple valve replacement with the St. Jude Medical device at the University Hospital Zürich 1980-1987. In: Surgery for heart valve disease. Proceedings of the 1989 Symposium. London: ICR, 1990:286-95.
11. Currie PJ, Seward JB, Reeder GS, et al. Continuous-wave Doppler echocardiographic assessment of severity of calcific aortic stenosis: a simultaneous Doppler-catheter correlative study in 100 adult patients. Circulation 1985;71:1162-9.
12. Cooper DW, Stewart WJ, Schiavone WA. Evaluation of normal prosthetic valve function by Doppler echocardiography. Am Heart J 1987;114:576-82.
13. Panidis IP, Ross J, Mintz GS. Normal and abnormal prosthetic valve function as assessed by Doppler echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1986;8:317-26.
14. Kisanuki A, Tei C, Arikawa K. Continuous wave Doppler echocardiographic assessment of prosthetic aortic valves. J Cardiogr 1986;16:121-32.
15. Burstow DJ, Nishimura RA, Bailey KR, et al. Continuous wave Doppler echocardiographic measurement of prosthetic valve gradients. Circulation 1989;80:504-14.
16. Jaffe WM, Coverdale HA, Roche AH, Whitlock RM, Neutze JM, Barratt-Boyes BG. Rest and exercise hemodynamics of 20 to 23 mm allograft, Medtronic Intact (porcine), and St. Jude Medical valves in the aortic position. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1990;100:167-74.
17. Stewart SF, Nast EP, Arabia FA, Talbot TL, Proschan M, Clark RE. Errors in pressure gradient measurement by continuous wave Doppler ultrasound: type, size and age effects in bioprosthetic aortic valves. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991;18:769-79.
18. Gordon JB, Folland ED. Analysis of aortic valve gradients by transseptal technique: implications for noninvasive evaluation. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1989;17:144-51.
19. Rothbart RM, Schmucker ML, Gibson RS. Overestimation by Doppler echocardiography of pressure gradients across Starr-Edwards prosthetic valves in the aortic position. Am J Cardiol 1988;61:475-6.
20. Lillehei CW. Worldwide experience with the St. Jude Medical valve prosthesis: clinical and hemodynamic results. J Jpn Ass Thorac Surg 1982;30:466-76.
21. Nicoloff DM, Emery RW, Arom KV, et al. Clinical and hemodynamic results with the St Jude Medical cardiac valve prosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1981;82:674-83.
22. Albes JM, Yeter R, Haverich A. Hemodynamic comparison between CarboMedics and St. Jude valves. In: Proceedings of the second international clinical symposium. Toronto, Ontario, Canada, May 6, 1990. Austin, TX: Silent Partners, 1990:111-7.
23. Chaux A, Gray RJ, Matloff JM, Feldman H, Sustaita H. An appreciation of the new St. Jude valvular prosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1981;81:202-11.
24. Wortham DC, Tri TB, Bowen TE. Hemodynamic evaluation of the St. Jude Medical valve prosthesis in the small aortic annulus. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1981;81:615-20.
25. Laurent M, Varin C, Pasquali V, et al. Left intraventricular dynamic gradients in the follow-up of aortic valve replacement: an echo-Doppler study. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss 1993; 86:471-7.
26. Shigenobu M, Sano S. Criteria to select proper valve prosthesis for aortic valve replacement. Comparative assessment of various valve prostheses via continuous wave Doppler echocardiography. J Cardiovasc Surg Torino 1993;34:203-8.
27. Reisner SA, Meltzer RS. Normal values of prosthetic valve Doppler echocardiographic parameters: a review. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 1988;1:201-10.
28. Dumesnil JG, Yoganathan AP. Valve prosthesis hemodynamics and the problem of high transprosthetic pressure gradients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1992;6(Suppl 1):S34-7.
29. Labovitz AJ. Assessment of prosthetic heart valve function by Doppler echocardiography. A decade of experience. Circulation 1989;80:707-9.
30. Baumgartner H, Khan S, DeRobertis M, Czer L, Maurer G. Discrepancies between Doppler and catheter gradients in aortic prosthetic valves in vitro - a manifestation of localized gradients and pressure recovery. Circulation 1990;82:1467-75.
31. Baumgartner H, Khan S, DeRobertis M, Czer L, Maurer G. Effect of prosthetic aortic valve design on the Doppler-catheter gradient correlation: an in vitro study of normal St. Jude, Medtronic-Hall, Stair-Edwards and Hancock valves. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992,19:324-32.
32. Khan S. Assessment of prosthetic valve hemodynamics by Doppler: lessons from in vitro studies of the St. Jude valve. J Heart Valve Dis 1993;2:183-93.
33. Voelker W, Reul H, Stelzer T, Schmidt A, Karsch KR. Pressure recovery in aortic stenosis: an in vitro study in a pulsatile flow model. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992;20:1585-93.
34. Baumgartner H, Schima H, Tulzer G, Kühn P. Effect of valve malfunction on the Doppler-catheter gradient relation in vitro [Abstract]. Circulation 1992;86(Suppl 1):806.