Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital

Vector Flow Imaging of the Ascending Aorta in Patients with Tricuspid and Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis Treated with Biological and Mechanical Implants

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  1. Medical Student Ultrasound Education: A WFUMB Position Paper, Part I

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

  2. Respiratory variability of peak velocities in the common femoral vein estimated with vector flow imaging and Doppler ultrasound

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. A Comparison Study of Vector Velocity, Spectral Doppler and Magnetic Resonance of Blood Flow in the Common Carotid Artery

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Accuracy and Precision of a Plane Wave Vector Flow Imaging Method in the Healthy Carotid Artery

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

Aortic valve stenosis (AS) is treated with biological prostheses (BPs) and mechanical prostheses (MPs). Vector flow imaging (VFI), an angle-independent ultrasound method, can quantify flow complexity (vector concentration (VC)) and secondary rotation (SR). Ten patients (mean age: 70.7 y) with tricuspid AS scheduled for BPs, 10 patients (mean age: 56.2 y) with bicuspid AS scheduled for MPs and 10 patients (mean age: 63.9 y) with normal aortic valves were scanned intra-operatively on the ascending aorta with VFI and conventional spectral Doppler. Bicuspid AS (peak systolic velocity (PSV): 380.9 cm/s, SR: 16.7 Hz, VC: 0.21) had more complex flow (p < 0.02) than tricuspid AS (PSV: 346.1 cm/s, SR: 17.1 Hz, VC: 0.33). Both groups had more complex and faster flow (p < 0.0001) than normal aortic valve patients (PSV: 124.0 cm/s, SR: 4.3 Hz, VC: 0.79). VC (r = 0.87) and SR (r = 0.89) correlated to PSV. After surgery, flow parameters changed (p < 0.0001) for patients with MPs (PSV: 250.4 cm/s, SR: 9.8 Hz, VC: 0.54) and BPs (PSV: 232.4 cm/s, SR: 12.5 Hz, VC: 0.61), with MPs having slower SR (p < 0.01). None of the implants had normal flow (p < 0.0001). In conclusion, VFI can provide new flow parameters for AS and implant assessment.

TidsskriftUltrasound in Medicine & Biology
Udgave nummer1
Sider (fra-til)64-72
Antal sider9
StatusUdgivet - jan. 2020

Bibliografisk note

Copyright © 2019 World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

ID: 58573272