Abstract
Echocardiographic evaluation of prosthetic valves is similar in many respects to evaluation of native valve disease. However, there are some important differences. First, there are several types of prosthetic valves with different fluid dynamics for each basic design and differing flow velocities for each valve size. Second, the mechanisms of valve dysfunction are somewhat different from those for native valve disease. Third, the technical aspects of imaging artificial devices, specifically the problem of acoustic shadowing, significantly affect the diagnostic approach when prosthetic valve dysfunction is suspected. Fourth, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has rapidly expanded in recent years. Echocardiography plays an essential role in identifying patients suitable for TAVI and providing intra-procedural monitoring, and is the modality for post-procedure follow-up. Both an understanding of the basic approach to echocardiographic evaluation and detailed knowledge of the specific flow dynamics for the size and type of prosthesis in an individual patient are needed for appropriate patient management.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines. Circulation. 2014;129:e521–643.
Bach DS. Echo/Doppler evaluation of hemodynamics after aortic valve replacement: principles of interrogation and evaluation of high gradients. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3:296–304.
Habets J, Budde RP, Symersky P, et al. Diagnostic evaluation of left-sided prosthetic heart valve dysfunction. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2011;8:466–78.
Rahimtoola SH. Choice of prosthetic heart valve in adults. An update. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:2413–26.
Zoghbi WA, Chambers JB, Dumesnil JG, et al. Recommendations for evaluation of prosthetic valves with echocardiography and Doppler ultrasound. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2009;22:975–1014.
Baumgartner H, Khan S, DeRobertis M, et al. 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.
Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG. Prosthetic heart valves: selection of the optimal prosthesis and long-term management. Circulation. 2009;119:1034–48.
Zamorano JL, Badano LP, Bruce C, et al. EAE/ASE recommendations for the use of echocardiography in new transcatheter interventions for valvular heart disease. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2011;24:937–65.
Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Genereux P, et al. Updated standardized endpoint definition for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;145:6–23.
Fernandes V, Olmos L, Nagueh SF, et al. Peak early diastolic velocity rather than pressure half-time is the best index of mechanical prosthetic mitral valve function. Am J Cardiol. 2002;89:704–10.
Blauwet LA, DanielsonGK Burkhart HM, et al. Comprehensive echocardiographic assessment of the hemodynamic parameters of 285 tricuspid valve bioprostheses early after implantation. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2010;23:1045–59.
Mohty D, Malouf JF, Girard SE, et al. Impact of prosthesis–patient mismatch on long-term survival in patients with small St Jude medical mechanical prostheses in the aortic position. Circulation. 2006;113:420–6.
Picano E, Pibarott P, Lacellotti P, et al. The emerging role of exercise testing and stress echocardiography in valvular heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:2251–60.
Athappan G, Patvardhan E, Tuzcu EM, et al. Incidence, predictors and outcomes of aortic regurgitation after transcatherer aortic valve replacement: meta-analysis and systemic review of literature. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1585–95.
Biner S, Kar S, Siegel RJ, et al. Value of color Doppler three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography in the percutaneous closure of mitral prosthesis paravalvular leak. Am J Cardiol. 2010;105:984–9.
Garcia MJ, Vandervoort P, Stewart WJ, et al. Mechanism of hemolysis with mitral prosthetic regurgitation. Study using transesophageal echocardiography and fluid dynamic simulation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;27:399–406.
Barbetseas J, Nagueh SF, Pitsavos C, et al. Differentiating thrombus from pannus formation in obstructed mechanical prosthetic valves: an evaluation of clinical, transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiographic parameters. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:1410–7.
Kronzon I, Sugeng L, Perk G, et al. Real-time 3-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography in the evaluation of post-operative mitral annuloplasty ring and prosthetic valve dehiscence. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:1543–7.
Hoen B, Duval X. Infective endocarditis. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:1425–33.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author has no conflicts of interest to declare.
Human rights statements and informed consent
All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 (5). Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in this review.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tanabe, K. Echocardiographic assessment of prosthetic valves. J Echocardiogr 13, 126–133 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12574-015-0261-5
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12574-015-0261-5