Impact of pressure recovery in the evaluation of the Omnicarbon™ tilting disc valve

Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon

Volumn 54, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 173-177

  Dohmen, Guido ^a,b   Schmitz, C ^a   Langebartels, G ^a   Steinseifer, U ^a   Schmitz Rode, T ^a   Autschbach, R ^a  

^a RWTH AACHEN UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b Clinic for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery   (Germany)

Author keywords

Omnicarbon valve; Pressure recovery; Transvalvular gradient

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CIRCULATION; DOPPLER ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; HEART OUTPUT; HEART RATE; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HEMODYNAMICS; PRESSURE GRADIENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

AORTIC VALVE; BLOOD PRESSURE; CARDIAC OUTPUT; CORONARY CIRCULATION; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, DOPPLER; HEART RATE; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HUMANS; MODELS, CARDIOVASCULAR; PROSTHESIS DESIGN;

EID: 33646441283     PISSN: 01716425     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-873061     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Baumgartner H, Schima H, Tulzer G, Kuhn P. Effect of stenosis geometry on the Doppler-catheter gradient relation in vitro: a manifestation of pressure recovery. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21: 1018-1025
2. Khan SS. Assessment of prosthetic Valve hemodynamics by Doppler: Lessons learned from in vitro studies of the St. Jude valve. J Heart valve Dis 1993; 2: 183-193
3. 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: 1585-1593
4. Yoganathan AP. Fluid mechanics of aortic stenosis. Eur Heart J 1988; 9 (Suppl E): 13-17
5. Bech-Hanssen O, Caidahl K, Wallentin I, Brandberg J, Wranne B, Ask P. Aortic prosthetic valve design and size: relation to Doppler echocardiographic findings and pressure recovery - an in vitro study. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2000; 13: 39-50
6. Knott E, Reul H, Knoch M, Steinseifer U, Rau G. In vitro comparison of aortic heart valve prostheses. Part 1: Mechanical valves. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1988; 96: 952-961
7. Reul H, Minamitami H, Runge J. A hydraulic analog of the systemic and pulmonary circulation for testing artificial hearts. Proc ESAO 1975; 2: 120-127
8. 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, Starr-Edwards and Hancock valves. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19: 324-332
9. Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG. Hemodynamic and clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch in the aortic valve position and its prevention. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000; 36: 1131-1141
10. Heinrich RS, Fontaine AA, Gimes RY et al. Experimental analysis of fluid mechanical energy losses in aortic valve stenosis: importance of pressure recovery. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 1996; 24: 685-694
11. Garcia D, Dumesnil JG, Durand LG, Kadem L, Pibarot P. Discrepancies between catheter and Doppler estimates of valve effective orifice area can be predicted from the pressure recovery phenomenon. J Am Coll Card 2003; 41: 435-442
12. Walther T, Falk V, Weigl C et al. Discrepancy of sizers for conventional and stentless aortic valve implants. J Heart Valve Dis 1997; 6: 145-148