Pasta S, Gentile G, Raffa G M, Bellavia D, Chiarello G, Liotta R, Luca A, Scardulla C, Pilato M
Fondazione Ri.MED, Palermo, Italy; Department for the Treatment and Study of Cardiothoracic Diseases and Cardiothoracic Transplantation, IRCCS-ISMETT, Palermo, Italy.
Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Services, IRCCS-ISMETT, Palermo, Italy.
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017 Aug;54(2):254-263. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.05.016. Epub 2017 Jun 24.
OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: The development of ascending aortic dilatation in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is highly variable, and this makes surgical decision strategies particularly challenging. The purpose of this study was to identify new predictors, other than the well established aortic size, that may help to stratify the risk of aortic dilatation in BAV patients.
Using fluid-structure interaction analysis, both haemodynamic and structural parameters exerted on the ascending aortic wall of patients with either BAV (n = 21) or tricuspid aortic valve (TAV; n = 13) with comparable age and aortic diameter (42.7 ± 5.3 mm for BAV and 45.4 ± 10.0 mm for TAV) were compared. BAV phenotypes were stratified according to the leaflet fusion pattern and aortic shape.
Systolic wall shear stress (WSS) of BAV patients was higher than TAV patients at the sinotubular junction (6.8 ± 3.3 N/m for BAV and 3.9 ± 1.3 N/m for TAV; p = .006) and mid-ascending aorta (9.8 ± 3.3 N/m for BAV and 7.1 ± 2.3 N/m for TAV; p = .040). A statistically significant difference in BAV versus TAV was also observed for the intramural stress along the ascending aorta (e.g., 2.54 × 10 ± 0.32 × 10 N/m for BAV and 2.04 × 10 ± 0.34 × 10 N/m for TAV; p < .001) and pressure index (0.329 ± 0.107 for BAV and 0.223 ± 0.139 for TAV; p = .030). Differences in the BAV phenotypes (i.e., BAV type 1 vs. BAV type 2) and aortopathy (i.e., isolated tubular vs. aortic root dilatations) were associated with asymmetric WSS distributions in the right anterior aortic wall and right posterior aortic wall, respectively.
These findings suggest that valve mediated haemodynamic and structural parameters may be used to identify which regions of aortic wall are at greater stress and enable the development of a personalised approach for the diagnosis and management of aortic dilatation beyond traditional guidelines.
目的/背景:二叶式主动脉瓣(BAV)患者升主动脉扩张的发展具有高度变异性,这使得手术决策策略极具挑战性。本研究的目的是确定除了已确定的主动脉大小之外的新预测因素,这些因素可能有助于对BAV患者主动脉扩张的风险进行分层。
使用流固耦合分析,比较了年龄和主动脉直径相当的BAV患者(n = 21)和三叶式主动脉瓣(TAV;n = 13)患者升主动脉壁上的血流动力学和结构参数(BAV患者主动脉直径为42.7±5.3mm,TAV患者为45.4±10.0mm)。根据瓣叶融合模式和主动脉形态对BAV表型进行分层。
BAV患者在窦管交界(BAV患者为6.8±3.3N/m,TAV患者为3.9±1.3N/m;p = 0.006)和升主动脉中部(BAV患者为9.8±3.3N/m,TAV患者为7.1±2.3N/m;p = 0.040)的收缩期壁面切应力(WSS)高于TAV患者。沿升主动脉的壁内应力(例如,BAV患者为2.54×10±0.32×10N/m,TAV患者为2.04×10±0.34×10N/m;p < 0.001)和压力指数(BAV患者为0.329±0.107,TAV患者为0.223±0.139;p = 0.030)在BAV和TAV之间也观察到统计学上的显著差异。BAV表型(即BAV 1型与BAV 2型)和主动脉病变(即孤立的管状扩张与主动脉根部扩张)的差异分别与右前主动脉壁和右后主动脉壁不对称的WSS分布相关。
这些发现表明,瓣膜介导的血流动力学和结构参数可用于识别主动脉壁中哪些区域承受更大的应力,并有助于制定超越传统指南的个性化主动脉扩张诊断和管理方法。