The hemodynamics of transcatheter aortic valves in transcatheter aortic valves

Abstract

BackgroundThe durability of transcatheter aortic valves (TAVs) remains their greatest disadvantage, given that fixed tissue leaflets are not immune to structural degeneration from calcification and thrombosis. Therefore, a second intervention is necessary, especially given that TAV in low-risk patients has shown noninferior outcomes compared with surgery. This study aimed to assess the hemodynamic and turbulent properties of the flow downstream with different TAV-in-TAV configurations, to offer basic hemodynamic guidance for future interventions when currently implanted valves structurally degrade. MethodsSix TAV-in-TAV configurations were chosen: 23 mm Evolut-in-26 mm Evolut, 23 mm Evolut-in-23 mm SAPIEN 3, 26 mm Evolut-in-26 mm Evolut, 26 mm Evolut-in-23 mm SAPIEN 3, 23 mm SAPIEN3-in-26 mm Evolut, and 23 mm SAPIEN3-in-23 mm SAPIEN 3. Their hemodynamic performance was assessed in a pulse duplicator for 100 cycles. High-speed imaging and particle image velocimetry were performed to assess turbulence. Effective orifice area (EOA), pinwheeling index (PI), and Reynolds shear stress (RSS) were evaluated. ResultsThe largest mean EOA was obtained with 23 mm SAPIEN-in-26 mm Evolut (2.07 ± 0.06 cm2), and the smallest was obtained with 23 mm Evolut-in-23 mm SAPIEN (1.50 ± 0.04 cm2) (P < .001). The highest mean PI was obtained with SAPIEN-in-SAPIEN (26.5 ± 2.00%), and the lowest was obtained with 26 mm Evolut-in-26 mm Evolut (7.5 ± 1.6%) (P < .01). At peak systole, the least detrimental RSS range was obtained with 23 mm Evolut-in-26 mm Evolut (up to ∼340 Pa), and the most detrimental RSS range was obtained with 23 mm Evolut-in-SAPIEN (∼900 Pa) (P < .01). ConclusionsThis study shows that best hemodynamic parameters are TAV-specific (implanted and to be implanted). In addition, it shows that RSS levels, which are indicative of turbulence levels and associated with blood damage, are 2- to 3-fold higher after TAV-in-TAV.