Bileaflet, tilting disc and porcine aortic valve substitutes: in vitro hydrodynamic characteristics

The desire for a low profile mechanical valve with better fluid dynamic performance led to the design and development of the St. Jude Medical bileaflet prosthesis. Comparative in vitro flow studies indicate that it has better pressure drop characteristics than the Bjork-Shiley (convexo-concave) and Carpentier-Edwards porcine valves in current clinical use, especially in the small sizes. In the 21 to 27 mm aortic valve size range the St. Jude valve has an average performance index of 0.66, compared with 0.46 and 0.32 for the Bjork-Shiley and Carpentier-Edwards valves, respectively. In contrast, the St. Jude valve has larger regurgitant volumes than both the Bjork-Shiley and Carpentier-Edwards valves. Velocity measurements with a laser-Doppler anemometer indicate relatively centralized flow with small amounts of turbulence downstream of the St. Jude valve. The flow is unevenly distributed between the central and side orifices. The turbulent shear stresses are, however, large enough to cause sublethal or lethal damage to blood elements. Wall shear stresses are smaller than those measured downstream of the Bjork-Shiley valve. Regions of flow separation were observed just downstream from the sewing ring, which could lead to excess tissue growth along the sewing ring. The results of this study indicate that overall in vitro fluid dynamic performance of the St. Jude valve is superior to that of the two other commonly used prostheses.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. De Paulis, F. Tomai, F. Bertoldo, A. S. Ghini, R. Scaffa, P. Nardi, and L. Chiariello Coronary flow characteristics after a Bentall procedure with or without sinuses of Valsalva Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, July 1, 2004; 26(1): 66 - 72. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Kleine, M. Scherer, U. Abdel-Rahman, A. A. Klesius, H. Ackermann, and A. Moritz Effect of mechanical aortic valve orientation on coronary artery flow: Comparison of tilting disc versus bileaflet prostheses in pigs J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., November 1, 2002; 124(5): 925 - 932. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				O. Bech-Hanssen, K. Caidahl, I. Wallentin, P. Ask, and B. Wranne Assessment of effective orifice area of prosthetic aortic valves with Doppler echocardiography: An in vivo and in vitro study J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., August 1, 2001; 122(2): 287 - 295. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Ismeno, A. Renzulli, M. De Feo, A. Della Corte, F. E. Covino, and M. Cotrufo Standard versus hemodynamic plus 19-mm St Jude Medical aortic valves J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., April 1, 2001; 121(4): 723 - 728. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Pibarot and J. G. Dumesnil Hemodynamic and clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch in the aortic valve position and its prevention J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 1, 2000; 36(4): 1131 - 1141. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Y. Leung, J. Wong, L. Rodriguez, M. Pu, P. M. Vandervoort, and J. D. Thomas Application of Color Doppler Flow Mapping to Calculate Orifice Area of St Jude Mitral Valve Circulation, September 22, 1998; 98(12): 1205 - 1211. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Kadir, M. B. Izzat, P. Wilde, B. Reeves, A. J. Bryan, and G. D. Angelini Dynamic Evaluation of the 21-mm Medtronic Intact Aortic Bioprosthesis by Dobutamine Echocardiography Ann. Thorac. Surg., April 1, 1997; 63(4): 1128 - 1132. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				A. Laske, R. Jenni, M. Maloigne, G. Vassalli, O. Bertel, and M. I. Turina Pressure Gradients Across Bileaflet Aortic Valves by Direct Measurement and Echocardiography Ann. Thorac. Surg., January 1, 1996; 61(1): 48 - 57. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				P. G. Walker and A. P. Yoganathan In vitro pulsatile flow hemodynamics of five mechanical aortic heart valve prostheses Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, January 1, 1992; 6(Supplement_1): S113 - S123. [Abstract] [PDF]

				O. Isik, M. Balkanay, B. Kisacikoglu, H. Tanugur, O. Bayezid, and C. Yakut Results of 300 Bileaflet Mechanical Valve Implanatations Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, June 1, 1991; 25(5): 357 - 367. [Abstract] [PDF]