Response of two annular prostheses to functional mitral regurgitation main determinants: An in vitro evaluation

Emiliano Votta, Riccardo Vismara, Alberto Redaelli, Lorenzo Arcobasso, Francesco Maisano, Ottavio Alfieri, Gianfranco B. Fiore

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) is usually treated through annuloplasty, i.e., the restriction of the mitral annulus by implanting an undersized prosthetic ring. We conceived a steady-state fluid-dynamic mock simulator that allows for controlling the main mechanic determinants of FMR: transmitral pressure and papillary muscle (PM) apical and lateral dislocation. We used our system to compare the FMR-specific Geoform ring with the general purpose Physio ring in the treatment of FMR. Each ring was implanted on 10 excised fresh porcine valves. Different transmitral pressures (40, 80, 120, 140, and 160 mm Hg) and symmetrical PM apical displacements (2.5-15 mm, step 2.5 mm) were imposed with submillimetric precision. In each configuration, the regurgitant flow through the valve was measured. For PM apical displacement ≥7.5 mm, the regurgitant flow was lower (p <0.05) with the Geoform ring than with the Physio ring. Differences and their statistical significance increased as PM displacement or transmitral pressure increased. Regression analysis showed that this outcome did not depend on the morphology of the valves. The adopted approach proved itself simple and reliable and allowed to highlight the differences between the two examined annuloplasty devices in countering the two main determinants of FMR: high apical PM dislocation and transvalvular pressure.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)491-496
Number of pages6
JournalASAIO Journal
Volume56
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2010

Fingerprint

Papillary Muscles
Mitral Valve Insufficiency
Prosthetics
Prostheses and Implants
Muscle
Pressure
Fluid dynamics
Regression analysis
Mechanics
Swine
Simulators
Regression Analysis
In Vitro Techniques
Equipment and Supplies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Biomaterials
  • Bioengineering
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Response of two annular prostheses to functional mitral regurgitation main determinants : An in vitro evaluation. / Votta, Emiliano; Vismara, Riccardo; Redaelli, Alberto; Arcobasso, Lorenzo; Maisano, Francesco; Alfieri, Ottavio; Fiore, Gianfranco B.

In: ASAIO Journal, Vol. 56, No. 6, 11.2010, p. 491-496.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Votta, Emiliano ; Vismara, Riccardo ; Redaelli, Alberto ; Arcobasso, Lorenzo ; Maisano, Francesco ; Alfieri, Ottavio ; Fiore, Gianfranco B. / Response of two annular prostheses to functional mitral regurgitation main determinants : An in vitro evaluation. In: ASAIO Journal. 2010 ; Vol. 56, No. 6. pp. 491-496.
@article{328446984fb8404595d158a955af866a,
title = "Response of two annular prostheses to functional mitral regurgitation main determinants: An in vitro evaluation",
abstract = "Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) is usually treated through annuloplasty, i.e., the restriction of the mitral annulus by implanting an undersized prosthetic ring. We conceived a steady-state fluid-dynamic mock simulator that allows for controlling the main mechanic determinants of FMR: transmitral pressure and papillary muscle (PM) apical and lateral dislocation. We used our system to compare the FMR-specific Geoform ring with the general purpose Physio ring in the treatment of FMR. Each ring was implanted on 10 excised fresh porcine valves. Different transmitral pressures (40, 80, 120, 140, and 160 mm Hg) and symmetrical PM apical displacements (2.5-15 mm, step 2.5 mm) were imposed with submillimetric precision. In each configuration, the regurgitant flow through the valve was measured. For PM apical displacement ≥7.5 mm, the regurgitant flow was lower (p <0.05) with the Geoform ring than with the Physio ring. Differences and their statistical significance increased as PM displacement or transmitral pressure increased. Regression analysis showed that this outcome did not depend on the morphology of the valves. The adopted approach proved itself simple and reliable and allowed to highlight the differences between the two examined annuloplasty devices in countering the two main determinants of FMR: high apical PM dislocation and transvalvular pressure.",
author = "Emiliano Votta and Riccardo Vismara and Alberto Redaelli and Lorenzo Arcobasso and Francesco Maisano and Ottavio Alfieri and Fiore, {Gianfranco B.}",
year = "2010",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1097/MAT.0b013e3181f74777",
language = "English",
volume = "56",
pages = "491--496",
journal = "ASAIO Journal",
issn = "0162-1432",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Response of two annular prostheses to functional mitral regurgitation main determinants

T2 - An in vitro evaluation

AU - Votta, Emiliano

AU - Vismara, Riccardo

AU - Redaelli, Alberto

AU - Arcobasso, Lorenzo

AU - Maisano, Francesco

AU - Alfieri, Ottavio

AU - Fiore, Gianfranco B.

PY - 2010/11

Y1 - 2010/11

N2 - Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) is usually treated through annuloplasty, i.e., the restriction of the mitral annulus by implanting an undersized prosthetic ring. We conceived a steady-state fluid-dynamic mock simulator that allows for controlling the main mechanic determinants of FMR: transmitral pressure and papillary muscle (PM) apical and lateral dislocation. We used our system to compare the FMR-specific Geoform ring with the general purpose Physio ring in the treatment of FMR. Each ring was implanted on 10 excised fresh porcine valves. Different transmitral pressures (40, 80, 120, 140, and 160 mm Hg) and symmetrical PM apical displacements (2.5-15 mm, step 2.5 mm) were imposed with submillimetric precision. In each configuration, the regurgitant flow through the valve was measured. For PM apical displacement ≥7.5 mm, the regurgitant flow was lower (p <0.05) with the Geoform ring than with the Physio ring. Differences and their statistical significance increased as PM displacement or transmitral pressure increased. Regression analysis showed that this outcome did not depend on the morphology of the valves. The adopted approach proved itself simple and reliable and allowed to highlight the differences between the two examined annuloplasty devices in countering the two main determinants of FMR: high apical PM dislocation and transvalvular pressure.

AB - Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) is usually treated through annuloplasty, i.e., the restriction of the mitral annulus by implanting an undersized prosthetic ring. We conceived a steady-state fluid-dynamic mock simulator that allows for controlling the main mechanic determinants of FMR: transmitral pressure and papillary muscle (PM) apical and lateral dislocation. We used our system to compare the FMR-specific Geoform ring with the general purpose Physio ring in the treatment of FMR. Each ring was implanted on 10 excised fresh porcine valves. Different transmitral pressures (40, 80, 120, 140, and 160 mm Hg) and symmetrical PM apical displacements (2.5-15 mm, step 2.5 mm) were imposed with submillimetric precision. In each configuration, the regurgitant flow through the valve was measured. For PM apical displacement ≥7.5 mm, the regurgitant flow was lower (p <0.05) with the Geoform ring than with the Physio ring. Differences and their statistical significance increased as PM displacement or transmitral pressure increased. Regression analysis showed that this outcome did not depend on the morphology of the valves. The adopted approach proved itself simple and reliable and allowed to highlight the differences between the two examined annuloplasty devices in countering the two main determinants of FMR: high apical PM dislocation and transvalvular pressure.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78349301958&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78349301958&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/MAT.0b013e3181f74777

DO - 10.1097/MAT.0b013e3181f74777

M3 - Article

C2 - 21042057

AN - SCOPUS:78349301958

VL - 56

SP - 491

EP - 496

JO - ASAIO Journal

JF - ASAIO Journal

SN - 0162-1432

IS - 6

ER -