Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis
Abstract Background Decisions in the management of aortic stenosis are based on the peak pressure drop, captured by Doppler echocardiography, whereas gold standard catheterization measurements assess the net pressure drop but are limited by associate...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/147883 |
| _version_ | 1826192815778955264 |
|---|---|
| author | Fernandes, Joao F. Gill, Harminder Nio, Amanda Faraci, Alessandro Galli, Valeria Marlevi, David Bissell, Malenka Ha, Hojin Rajani, Ronak Mortier, Peter Myerson, Saul G. Dyverfeldt, Petter Ebbers, Tino Nordsletten, David A. |
| author2 | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Institute for Medical Engineering & Science |
| author_facet | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Institute for Medical Engineering & Science Fernandes, Joao F. Gill, Harminder Nio, Amanda Faraci, Alessandro Galli, Valeria Marlevi, David Bissell, Malenka Ha, Hojin Rajani, Ronak Mortier, Peter Myerson, Saul G. Dyverfeldt, Petter Ebbers, Tino Nordsletten, David A. |
| author_sort | Fernandes, Joao F. |
| collection | MIT |
| description | Abstract
Background
Decisions in the management of aortic stenosis are based on the peak pressure drop, captured by Doppler echocardiography, whereas gold standard catheterization measurements assess the net pressure drop but are limited by associated risks. The relationship between these two measurements, peak and net pressure drop, is dictated by the pressure recovery along the ascending aorta which is mainly caused by turbulence energy dissipation. Currently, pressure recovery is considered to occur within the first 40–50 mm distally from the aortic valve, albeit there is inconsistency across interventionist centers on where/how to position the catheter to capture the net pressure drop.
Methods
We developed a non-invasive method to assess the pressure recovery distance based on blood flow momentum via 4D Flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). Multi-center acquisitions included physical flow phantoms with different stenotic valve configurations to validate this method, first against reference measurements and then against turbulent energy dissipation (respectively n = 8 and n = 28 acquisitions) and to investigate the relationship between peak and net pressure drops. Finally, we explored the potential errors of cardiac catheterisation pressure recordings as a result of neglecting the pressure recovery distance in a clinical bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) cohort of n = 32 patients.
Results
In-vitro assessment of pressure recovery distance based on flow momentum achieved an average error of 1.8 ± 8.4 mm when compared to reference pressure sensors in the first phantom workbench. The momentum pressure recovery distance and the turbulent energy dissipation distance showed no statistical difference (mean difference of 2.8 ± 5.4 mm, R2 = 0.93) in the second phantom workbench. A linear correlation was observed between peak and net pressure drops, however, with strong dependences on the valvular morphology. Finally, in the BAV cohort the pressure recovery distance was 78.8 ± 34.3 mm from vena contracta, which is significantly longer than currently accepted in clinical practise (40–50 mm), and 37.5% of patients displayed a pressure recovery distance beyond the end of the ascending aorta.
Conclusion
The non-invasive assessment of the distance to pressure recovery is possible by tracking momentum via 4D Flow CMR. Recovery is not always complete at the ascending aorta, and catheterised recordings will overestimate the net pressure drop in those situations. There is a need to re-evaluate the methods that characterise the haemodynamic burden caused by aortic stenosis as currently clinically accepted pressure recovery distance is an underestimation. |
| first_indexed | 2024-09-23T09:29:17Z |
| format | Article |
| id | mit-1721.1/147883 |
| institution | Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-09-23T09:29:17Z |
| publishDate | 2023 |
| publisher | BioMed Central |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | mit-1721.1/1478832024-03-20T19:25:08Z Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis Fernandes, Joao F. Gill, Harminder Nio, Amanda Faraci, Alessandro Galli, Valeria Marlevi, David Bissell, Malenka Ha, Hojin Rajani, Ronak Mortier, Peter Myerson, Saul G. Dyverfeldt, Petter Ebbers, Tino Nordsletten, David A. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Institute for Medical Engineering & Science Abstract Background Decisions in the management of aortic stenosis are based on the peak pressure drop, captured by Doppler echocardiography, whereas gold standard catheterization measurements assess the net pressure drop but are limited by associated risks. The relationship between these two measurements, peak and net pressure drop, is dictated by the pressure recovery along the ascending aorta which is mainly caused by turbulence energy dissipation. Currently, pressure recovery is considered to occur within the first 40–50 mm distally from the aortic valve, albeit there is inconsistency across interventionist centers on where/how to position the catheter to capture the net pressure drop. Methods We developed a non-invasive method to assess the pressure recovery distance based on blood flow momentum via 4D Flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). Multi-center acquisitions included physical flow phantoms with different stenotic valve configurations to validate this method, first against reference measurements and then against turbulent energy dissipation (respectively n = 8 and n = 28 acquisitions) and to investigate the relationship between peak and net pressure drops. Finally, we explored the potential errors of cardiac catheterisation pressure recordings as a result of neglecting the pressure recovery distance in a clinical bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) cohort of n = 32 patients. Results In-vitro assessment of pressure recovery distance based on flow momentum achieved an average error of 1.8 ± 8.4 mm when compared to reference pressure sensors in the first phantom workbench. The momentum pressure recovery distance and the turbulent energy dissipation distance showed no statistical difference (mean difference of 2.8 ± 5.4 mm, R2 = 0.93) in the second phantom workbench. A linear correlation was observed between peak and net pressure drops, however, with strong dependences on the valvular morphology. Finally, in the BAV cohort the pressure recovery distance was 78.8 ± 34.3 mm from vena contracta, which is significantly longer than currently accepted in clinical practise (40–50 mm), and 37.5% of patients displayed a pressure recovery distance beyond the end of the ascending aorta. Conclusion The non-invasive assessment of the distance to pressure recovery is possible by tracking momentum via 4D Flow CMR. Recovery is not always complete at the ascending aorta, and catheterised recordings will overestimate the net pressure drop in those situations. There is a need to re-evaluate the methods that characterise the haemodynamic burden caused by aortic stenosis as currently clinically accepted pressure recovery distance is an underestimation. 2023-02-06T13:16:12Z 2023-02-06T13:16:12Z 2023-01-30 2023-02-05T04:20:39Z Article http://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/147883 Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. 2023 Jan 30;25(1):5 PUBLISHER_CC en https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-023-00914-3 Creative Commons Attribution https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ The Author(s) application/pdf BioMed Central BioMed Central |
| spellingShingle | Fernandes, Joao F. Gill, Harminder Nio, Amanda Faraci, Alessandro Galli, Valeria Marlevi, David Bissell, Malenka Ha, Hojin Rajani, Ronak Mortier, Peter Myerson, Saul G. Dyverfeldt, Petter Ebbers, Tino Nordsletten, David A. Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis |
| title | Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis |
| title_full | Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis |
| title_fullStr | Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis |
| title_short | Non-invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis |
| title_sort | non invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of pressure recovery distance after aortic valve stenosis |
| url | https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/147883 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fernandesjoaof noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT gillharminder noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT nioamanda noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT faracialessandro noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT gallivaleria noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT marlevidavid noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT bissellmalenka noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT hahojin noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT rajanironak noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT mortierpeter noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT myersonsaulg noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT dyverfeldtpetter noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT ebberstino noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis AT nordslettendavida noninvasivecardiovascularmagneticresonanceassessmentofpressurerecoverydistanceafteraorticvalvestenosis |