Experimental Study of Right Ventricular Hemodynamics After Tricuspid Valve Replacement Therapies to Treat Tricuspid Regurgitation
- 286 Downloads
The increased understanding of right heart diseases has led to more aggressive interventions to manage functional tricuspid regurgitation (FTR). In some cases of FTR, prosthetic valve replacement is typically considered when concomitant organic components or significant geometrical distortions are involved in the pathology of the tricuspid valve. However, little is known of the performance of current devices in the right heart circulation. In this study, a novel in vitro mock circulatory system that incorporated a realistic tricuspid valve apparatus in a patient-specific silicon right ventricle (RV) was designed and fabricated. The system was calibrated to emulate severe FTR, enabling the investigation of RV hemodynamics in pre- and post-implantation of tri-leaflet tissue implant and bi-leaflet mechanical implant. 2D particle imaging velocimetry was performed to visualize flow and quantify relevant hemodynamic parameters. While our results showed all prosthetic implants improved cardiac output, these implants also subjected the RV to increased turbulence level. Our study also revealed that the implants did not create the optimal behavior of fluid transfer in the RV as we expected. Among the implants tested, tissue implant created the most dominant vortices, which persisted throughout diastole; its observed strong negative vortex could lead to increase energy expenditure due to undesired fluid direction. In contrast, both native valve and mechanical implant had both weaker vortex formation as well as more significant vortex dissipation. Interestingly, the vortex dissipation of native valve was associated with streamlined flow pattern that tended towards the pulmonary outlet, while the mechanical implant generated more regions of flow stagnation within the RV. These findings heighten the imperative to improve designs of current heart valves to be used in the right circulation.
KeywordsBioprosthetic valve Functional tricuspid regurgitation Hemodynamics Mechanical valve Right ventricle Tricuspid valve Valve replacement Vortex Prosthetic valve
Functional tricuspid regurgitation
Particle imaging velocimetry
Principal Reynolds shear stress
Turbulence kinetic energy
Viscous shear stress
Conflict of interest
All authors declare no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- 1.Allen, H. D., D. J. Driscoll, R. E. Shaddy, and T. F. Feltes. Moss & Adams’ Heart Disease in Infants, Children, and Adolescents: Including the Fetus and Young Adult. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2013.Google Scholar
- 6.Faludi, R., M. Szulik, J. D’hooge, P. Herijgers, F. Rademakers, G. Pedrizzetti, et al. Left ventricular flow patterns in healthy subjects and patients with prosthetic mitral valves: an in vivo study using echocardiographic particle image velocimetry. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 139(6):1501–1510, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Hunt, J. C., A. A. Wray, and P. Moin. Eddies, streams, and convergence zones in turbulent flows. 1988.Google Scholar
- 16.Lancellotti, P., L. Moura, L. A. Pierard, E. Agricola, B. A. Popescu, C. Tribouilloy, et al. European Association of Echocardiography recommendations for the assessment of valvular regurgitation. Part 2: mitral and tricuspid regurgitation (native valve disease). Eur. J. Echocardiogr. 11(4):307–332, 2010. doi: 10.1093/ejechocard/jeq031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Leo, H. L. An in vitro investigation of the flow fields through bileaflet and polymeric prosthetic heart valves. 2005.Google Scholar
- 27.Murphy, D. W. The application of passive flow control to bileaflet mechanical heart valve leakage jets. 2009.Google Scholar
- 37.Songur, C. M., E. Simsek, A. Ozen, S. Kocabeyoglu, and T. A. Donmez. Long term results comparing mechanical and biological prostheses in the tricuspid valve position: which valve types are better–mechanical or biological prostheses? Heart Lung Circ. 23(12):1175–1178, 2014. doi: 10.1016/j.hlc.2014.05.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar