Annals of Biomedical Engineering

, Volume 33, Issue 12, pp 1689–1694 | Cite as

Flow in Prosthetic Heart Valves: State-of-the-Art and Future Directions

  • Ajit P. YoganathanEmail author
  • K. B. Chandran
  • Fotis Sotiropoulos


Since the first successful implantation of a prosthetic heart valve four decades ago, over 50 different designs have been developed including both mechanical and bioprosthetic valves. Today, the most widely implanted design is the mechanical bileaflet, with over 170,000 implants worldwide each year. Several different mechanical valves are currently available and many of them have good bulk forward flow hemodynamics, with lower transvalvular pressure drops, larger effective orifice areas, and fewer regions of forward flow stasis than their earlier-generation counterparts such as the ball-and-cage and tilting-disc valves. However, mechanical valve implants suffer from complications resulting from thrombus deposition and patients implanted with these valves need to be under long-term anti-coagulant therapy. In general, blood thinners are not needed with bioprosthetic implants, but tissue valves suffer from structural failure with, an average life-time of 10–12 years, before replacement is needed. Flow-induced stresses on the formed elements in blood have been implicated in thrombus initiation within the mechanical valve prostheses. Regions of stress concentration on the leaflets during the complex motion of the leaflets have been implicated with structural failure of the leaflets with bioprosthetic valves. In vivo and in vitro experimental studies have yielded valuable information on the relationship between hemodynamic stresses and the problems associated with the implants. More recently, Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) has emerged as a promising tool, which, alongside experimentation, can yield insights of unprecedented detail into the hemodynamics of prosthetic heart valves. For CFD to realize its full potential, however, it must rely on numerical techniques that can handle the enormous geometrical complexities of prosthetic devices with spatial and temporal resolution sufficiently high to accurately capture all hemodynamically relevant scales of motion. Such algorithms do not exist today and their development should be a major research priority. For CFD to further gain the confidence of valve designers and medical practitioners it must also undergo comprehensive validation with experimental data. Such validation requires the use of high-resolution flow measuring tools and techniques and the integration of experimental studies with CFD modeling.


Prosthetic heart valves Mechanical implants Bioprosthetic implants Blood flow Computational fluid dynamics Experimental techniques 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Baldwin, J. T., J. M. Tarbell, S. Deutsch, and D. B. Geselowitz. Mean velocities and Reynolds stresses within regurgitant jets produced by tilting valves. ASAIO Trans. 37:M348–M349, 1991.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bluestein, D. Research approaches for studying flow induced thromboembolic complications in blood recirculating devices. Expert Rev. Med. Devices 1:65–80, 2004.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brown, C. H. III, L. B. Leverett, C. W. Lewis, C. P. Alfrey, and Jr. J. D. Hellums. Morphological, biochemical, and functional changes in human platelets subjected to shear stress. J. Lab. Clin. Med. 86:462–471, 1975.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chandran, K. B., G. N. Cabell, B. Khalighi, and C. J. Chen. Laser anemometry measurements of pulsatile flow past aortic valve prostheses. J. Biomech. 16:865–873, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chandran, K. B., E. U. Dexter, S. Aluri, and W. E. Richenbacher. Negative pressure transients with mechanical heart-valve closure: correlation between in vitro and in vivo results. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 26:546–556, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chandran, K. B., C. S. Lee, and L. D. Chen. Pressure field in the vicinity of mecha nical valve occluders at the instant of valve closure: correlation with cavitation initiation. J. Heart Valve Dis. 3(Suppl 1):S65–S75; discussion S75–S66, 1994.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cheng R. A fluid-structure interaction simulation of mechanical heart valve flow dynamics. MS thesis, University of Iowa, 2003.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cheng, R., Y.-G. Lai, and K. B. Chandran. Two-dimensional fluid-structure interaction simulation of bi-leaflet mehcanical heart valve flow dynamics. Heart Valve Dis. 12:772–780, 2003.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dale, J., and E. Myhre. Intravascular hemolysis in the late course of aortic valve replacement: Relation to valve type, size, and function. Am. Heart J. 96:24–30, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ellis, J. T. An In Vitro Investigation of the Leakage and Hinge flow fields through bileaflet mechanical heart valves and their relevance to thrombogenesis, PhD thesis. Georgia Institute of Technology, 1999.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ellis, J. T., T. M. Healy, A. A. Fontaine, R. Saxena, and A. P. Yoganathan. Velocity measurements and flow patterns within the hinge region of a medtronic parallel bileaflet mechanical valve with clear housing. J. Heart Valve Dis. 5:591–599, 1996.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ellis, J. T., T. M. Healy, A. A. Fontaine, M. W. Weston, C. A. Jarret, R. Saxena, and A. P. Yoganathan. An in vitro investigation of the retrograde flow fields of two bileaflet mechanical heart valves. J. Heart Valve Dis. 5:600–606, 1996.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fontaine, A. A., S. He, R. Stadter, J. T. Ellis, R. A. Levine, and A. P. Yoganathan. In vitro assessment of prosthetic valve function in mitral valve replacement with chordal preservation techniques. J. Heart Valve Dis. 5:186–198, 1996.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ge, L., S. C. Jones, F. Sotiropoulos, T. M. Healy, and A. P. Yoganathan. Numerical simulation of flow in mechanical heart valves: Grid resolution and flow symmetry. J. Biomech. Eng. 125:709–718, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Harker, L., and S. Slichter. Studies of platelet and fibrinogen kinetics in patients with prosthetic heart valves. N Engl. J. Med. 283:1302–1305, 1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kafesjian, R., M. Howanec, G. D. Ward, L. Diep, L. S. Wagstaff, and R. Rhee. Cavitation damage of pyrolytic carbon in mechanical heart valves. J. Heart Valve Dis. 3(Suppl 1):S2–S7, 1994.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    King, M. J., J. Corden, T. David, and J. Fisher. A three-dimensional, time-dependent analysis of flow through a bileaflet mechanical heart valve: comparison of experimental and numerical results. J. Biomech. 29:609–618, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kiris, C., D. Kwak, S. Rogers, and I. D. Chang. Computational approach for probing the flow through artificial heart devices. J. Biomech. Eng. 119:452–460, 1997.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Klepetko, W., A. Moritz, J. Mlczoch, H. Schurawitzki, E. Domanig, and E. Wolner. Leaflet fracture in Edwards-Duromedics bileaflet valves. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 97:90–94, 1989.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Koppensteiner, R., A. Moritz, W. Schlick, G. Fenzl, S. Roedler, H. Ehringer, and E. Wollner. Blood rheology after cardiac valve replacement with mechanical prostheses or bioprostheses. Am. J. Cardiol. 67:79–83, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Krafczyk, M., M. Cerrolaza, M. Schulz, and E. Rank. Analysis of 3D transient blood flow passing through an artificial aortic valve by lattice-Boltzmann methods. J. Biomech. 31:453–462, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lai, Y. G., K. B. Chandran, and J. Lemmon. A numerical simulation of mechanical heart valve closure fluid dynamics. J. Biomech. 35:881–892, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee, C. S., K. B. Chandran, and L. D. Chen. Cavitation dynamics of mechanical heart valve prostheses. Artif. Organs 18:758–767, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Leo, H. L., Z. He, J. T. Ellis, and A. P. Yoganathan. Microflow fields in the hinge region of the CarboMedics bileaflet mechanical heart valve design. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 124:561–574, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Makhijani, V. B., J. M. Siegel, and Jr. N. H. Hwang. Numerical study of squeeze-flow in tilting-disc mechanical heart valves. J. Heart Valve Dis. 5:97–103, 1996.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Meyer, R. S., S. Deutsch, J. C. Maymir, D. B. Geselowitz, and J. M. Tarbell. Three-component laser Doppler velocimetry measurements in the regurgitant flow region of a Bjork–Shiley monostrut mitral valve. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 25:1081–1091, 1997.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sallam, A., and N. Hwang. Human red blood cell hemolysis in a turbulent shear flow: Contribution of reynolds shear stresses. Biorheology 21:783–797, 1984.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shim, E., and K. Chang. Three-dimensional vortex flow past a tilting-disc valve using a segregated finite element scheme. Comput. Dyn. J. 3:205, 1994.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Skoularigis, J., M. R. Essop, D. Skudicky, S. J. Middlemost, and P. Sareli. Frequency and severity of intravascular hemolysis after left-sided cardiac valve replacement with Medtronic Hall and St. Jude Medical prostheses, and influence of prosthetic type, position, size and number. Am. J. Cardiol. 71:587–591, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Travis, B. R., T. D. Christensen, M. Smerup, M. S. Olsen, J. M. Hasenkam, and H. Nygaard. An in vivo method for measuring turbulence in mechanical prosthesis leakage jets. J. Biomech. Eng. 126:26–35, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wieting, D., E. Breznock, R. Kafesjian, et al. Exercising sheep: An In vivo model for assessing the durability of pyrolytic carbon heart valves. Int. J. Artif. Organs. 13:529–643, 1990.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wurzinger, L., P. Blasberg, and H. Schmid-Schonbein. Towards a concept of thrombosis in accelerated flow: Rheology, fluid dynamics, and bioche mistry. Biorheology 22:437–450, 1985.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yoganathan, A. P., Y. Woo, and H. Sung. Turbulent shear stress measurements in the vicinity of aortic heart valve prostheses. J. Biomech. 19:433–442, 1986.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Biomedical Engineering Society 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ajit P. Yoganathan
    • 1
    • 4
    Email author
  • K. B. Chandran
    • 2
  • Fotis Sotiropoulos
    • 3
  1. 1.Wallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical EngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlanta
  2. 2.Department of Biomedical EngineeringThe University of IowaIowa City
  3. 3.School of Civil and Environmental EngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlanta
  4. 4.Wallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical EngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlanta

Personalised recommendations