Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology

, Volume 11, Issue 1–2, pp 231–244 | Cite as

Experimental measurement of dynamic fluid shear stress on the ventricular surface of the aortic valve leaflet

  • Choon Hwai Yap
  • Neelakantan Saikrishnan
  • Ajit P. YoganathanEmail author
Original Paper


Aortic valve (AV) calcification is a highly prevalent disease with serious impact on mortality and morbidity. The exact causes and mechanisms of AV calcification are unclear, although previous studies suggest that mechanical forces play a role. It has been clinically demonstrated that calcification preferentially occurs on the aortic surface of the AV. This is hypothesized to be due to differences in the mechanical environments on the two sides of the valve. It is thus necessary to characterize fluid shear forces acting on both sides of the leaflet to test this hypothesis. The current study is one of two studies characterizing dynamic shear stress on both sides of the AV leaflets. In the current study, shear stresses on the ventricular surface of the AV leaflets were measured experimentally on two prosthetic AV models with transparent leaflets in an in vitro pulsatile flow loop using two-component Laser Doppler Velocimetry (LDV). Experimental measurements were utilized to validate a theoretical model of AV ventricular surface shear stress based on the Womersley profile in a straight tube, with corrections for the opening angle of the valve leaflets. This theoretical model was applied to in vivo data based on MRI-derived volumetric flow rates and valve dimension obtained from the literature. Experimental results showed that ventricular surface shear stress was dominated by the streamwise component. The systolic shear stress waveform resembled a half-sinusoid during systole and peaks at 64–71 dyn/cm2, and reversed in direction at the end of systole for 15–25 ms, and reached a significant negative magnitude of 40–51 dyn/cm2. Shear stresses from the theoretical model applied to in vivo data showed that shear stresses peaked at 77–92 dyn/cm2 and reversed in direction for substantial period of time (108–110 ms) during late systole with peak negative shear stress of 35–38 dyn/cm2.


Aortic valve Fluid shear stress Laser Doppler Velocimetry Ventricular surface Aortic valve fluid mechanics 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Balachandran K, Sucosky P, Jo H, Yoganathan AP (2009) Elevated cyclic stretch alters matrix remodeling in aortic valve cusps: implications for degenerative aortic valve disease. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 296(3): H756–H764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bellhouse BJ, Reid KG (1969) Fluid mechanics of the aortic valve. Br Heart J 31(3): 391Google Scholar
  3. Butcher JT, Tressel S, Johnson T, Turner D, Sorescu G, Jo H, Nerem RM (2006) Transcriptional profiles of valvular and vascular endothelial cells reveal phenotypic differences: influence of shear stress. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 26(1): 69–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carmody CJ, Burriesci G, Howard IC, Patterson EA (2006) An approach to the simulation of fluid-structure interaction in the aortic valve. J Biomech 39(1): 158–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cerny L, Walawender W (1966) The flow of a viscous liquid in a converging tube. Bull Math Biol 28(1): 11–24zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. De Hart J, Peters GW, Schreurs PJ, Baaijens FP (2003) A three-dimensional computational analysis of fluid-structure interaction in the aortic valve. J Biomech 36(1): 103–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. De Hart J, Peters GW, Schreurs PJ, Baaijens FP (2004) Collagen fibers reduce stresses and stabilize motion of aortic valve leaflets during systole. J Biomech 37(3): 303–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Freeman RV, Otto CM (2005) Spectrum of calcific aortic valve disease: pathogenesis, disease progression, and treatment strategies. Circulation 111(24): 3316–3326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ge L, Sotiropoulos F (2010) Direction and magnitude of blood flow shear stresses on the leaflets of aortic valves:is there a link with valve calcification?. J Biomech Eng 132(1): 014505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hale JF, Mc DD, Womersley JR (1955) Velocity profiles of oscillating arterial flow, with some calculations of viscous drag and the Reynolds numbers. J Physiol 128(3): 629–640Google Scholar
  11. Langerak SE, Kunz P, Vliegen HW, Lamb HJ, Jukema JW, van Der Wall EE, de Roos A (2001) Improved MR flow mapping in coronary artery bypass grafts during adenosine-induced stress. Radiology 218(2): 540–547Google Scholar
  12. Leo HL, Dasi LP, Carberry J, Simon HA, Yoganathan AP (2006) Fluid dynamic assessment of three polymeric heart valves using particle image velocimetry. Ann Biomed Eng 34(6): 936–952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Leyh RG, Schmidtke C, Sievers HH, Yacoub MH (1999) Opening and closing characteristics of the aortic valve after different types of valve-preserving surgery. Circulation 100(21): 2153–2160Google Scholar
  14. Lindroos M, Kupari M, Heikkila J, Tilvis R (1993) Prevalence of aortic valve abnormalities in the elderly:an echocardiographic study of a random population sample. J Am Coll Cardiol 21(5): 1220–1225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Makhijani VB, Yang HQ, Dionne PJ, Thubrikar MJ (1997) Three-dimensional coupled fluid-structure simulation of pericardial bioprosthetic aortic valve function. ASAIO J 43(5): M387–M392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Morsi YS, Yang WW, Wong CS, Das S (2007) Transient fluid-structure coupling for simulation of a trileaflet heart valve using weak coupling. J Artif Organs 10(2): 96–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Powell AJ, Maier SE, Chung T, Geva T (2000) Phase-velocity cine magnetic resonance imaging measurement of pulsatile blood flow in children and young adults: in vitro and in vivo validation. Pediatr Cardiol 21(2): 104–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rao AR, Devanathan R (1973) Pulsatile flow in tubes of varying cross-sections. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Physik (ZAMP) 24(2): 203–213CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Ren-jing C, Chan Q (1993) Boundary layer development of pulsatile blood flow in a tapered vessel. Appl Math Mech 14(4): 319–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Roman MJ, Devereux RB, Kramer-Fox R, O’Loughlin J (1989) Two-dimensional echocardiographic aortic root dimensions in normal children and adults. Am J Cardiol 64(8): 507–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sacks MS, Schoen FJ, Mayer JE (2009) Bioengineering challenges for heart valve tissue engineering. Ann Rev Biomed Eng 11: 289–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sarraf CE, Harris AB, McCulloch AD, Eastwood M (2002) Tissue engineering of biological cardiovascular system surrogates. Heart Lung Circ 11(3): 142–150 (Discussion 151)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smith KE, Metzler SA, Warnock JN (2010) Cyclic strain inhibits acute pro-inflammatory gene expression in aortic valve interstitial cells. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 9(1): 117–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Stevens T, Rosenberg R, Aird W, Quertermous T, Johnson FL, Garcia JG, Hebbel RP, Tuder RM, Garfinkel S (2001) NHLBI workshop report: endothelial cell phenotypes in heart, lung, and blood diseases. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 281(5): C1422–C1433Google Scholar
  25. Sucosky P, Balachandran K, Elhammali A, Jo H, Yoganathan AP (2009) Altered shear stress stimulates upregulation of endothelial VCAM-1 and ICAM-1 in a BMP-4- and TGF-beta1-dependent pathway. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 29(2): 254–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Thubrikar M (1990) The aortic valve. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  27. Thubrikar M, Piepgrass WC, Shaner TW, Nolan SP (1981) The design of the normal aortic valve. Am J Physiol 241(6): H795–H801Google Scholar
  28. Topper JN, Gimbrone MAJr (1999) Blood flow and vascular gene expression: fluid shear stress as a modulator of endothelial phenotype. Mol Med Today 5(1):40–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Weinberg EJ, Kaazempur Mofrad MR (2008) A multiscale computational comparison of the bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valves in relation to calcific aortic stenosis. J Biomech 41(16): 3482–3487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Weston MW, LaBorde DV, Yoganathan AP (1999) Estimation of the shear stress on the surface of an aortic valve leaflet. Ann Biomed Eng 27(4): 572–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Xing Y, Warnock JN, He Z, Hilbert SL, Yoganathan AP (2004) Cyclic pressure affects the biological properties of porcine aortic valve leaflets in a magnitude and frequency dependent manner. Ann Biomed Eng 32(11): 1461–1470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yap CH, Dasi LP, Yoganathan AP (2010) Dynamic hemodynamic energy loss in normal and stenosed aortic valves. J Biomech Eng 132(2): 021005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yap CH, Kim HS, Balachandran K, Weiler M, Haj-Ali R, Yoganathan AP (2010) Dynamic deformation characteristics of porcine aortic valve leaflet under normal and hypertensive conditions. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 298(2): H395–H405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yap CH, Saikrishnan N, Tamilselvan G, Yoganathan AP (2011) Experimental measurement of dynamic fluid shear stress on the aortic surface of the aortic valve leaflet. Biomech Model Mechanobiol [Accepted 4 March 2011]Google Scholar
  35. Zeng Z, Yin Y, Jan KM, Rumschitzki DS (2007) Macromolecular transport in heart valves. II. Theoretical models. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 292(6): H2671–H2686CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Choon Hwai Yap
    • 1
  • Neelakantan Saikrishnan
    • 1
  • Ajit P. Yoganathan
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.The Wallace H. Coulter Distinguished Faculty Chair in Biomedical Engineering and Regents, Wallace H. Coulter School of Biomedical EngineeringGeorgia Institute of Technology and Emory UniversityAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations