4.3 Article

Transcatheter aortic valve deployment influences neo-sinus thrombosis risk: An in vitro flow study

Journal

CATHETERIZATION AND CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
Volume 95, Issue 5, Pages 1009-1016

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ccd.28388

Keywords

aortic valve disease; aortic valve disease; percutaneous intervention; transcatheter valve implantation

Funding

  1. Wallace H Coulter Endowed Chair
  2. Mary and James Wesley Fellowship Endowment
  3. BME Gurley Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives We investigated the impact of (transcatheter heart valve) THV expansion at the level of the native annulus and implant depth on valve performance and neo-sinus flow stasis. Background Flow stasis in the neo-sinus is one of the identified risk factors of THV thrombosis. Methods A 29 mm CoreValve and 26 mm SAPIEN 3 were deployed under different expansions (CoreValve, SAPIEN 3) and implant depths (CoreValve) within a patient-derived aortic root in a pulse duplicator. Fluorescent dye was injected during diastole into the neo-sinus and imaged over 20 cardiac cycles. Washout times were computed as a measure of flow stasis for each deployment. Results The 10% CoreValve under-expansion improved neo-sinus washout over full expansion by 8% (p < .001), and higher CoreValve implant depth improved neo-sinus washout (p < .001). The 10% SAPIEN 3 under-expansion improved neo-sinus washout by 23% (p < .001). Under-expansion of both valve types caused higher pressure gradients and smaller effective orifice areas than full expansion. Conclusions Neo-sinus flow stasis is influenced by THV expansion and implant depth (CoreValve). The 10% valve under-deployment (oversizing) may facilitate reduced flow stasis in the neo-sinus with minimal increase in pressure gradients. This strategy may be helpful for patient anatomies, which are in-between transcatheter valve sizes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available