Skip to main content
Download PDF

A comparison of two forms of the continuity equation in the Trifecta bovine pericardial aortic valve

Echo Research & Practice volume 3, pages 25–28 (2016)Cite this article

Abstract

Aim: To compare the classical and simplified form of the continuity equation in small Trifecta valves.

Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of post-operative echocardiograms performed for clinical reasons after implantation of Trifecta bioprosthetic valves.

Results: There were 60 patients aged 74 (range 38–89) years. For the valves of size 19, 21 and 23mm, the mean gradient was 11.3, 10.7 and 9.7mmHg, respectively. The effective orifice areas by the classical form of the continuity equation were 1.4, 1.7 and 1.9cm2, respectively. There was a good correlation between the two forms of the continuity equation, but they were significantly different using a t-test (P<0.00001). Results using the classical form were a mean 0.11 (s.d. 0.18)cm2 larger than those using the simple formula.

Conclusion: Haemodynamic function of the Trifecta valve in the small aortic root is good. There are significant differences between the classical and simplified forms of the continuity equation.

References

  1. Skjaerpe T, Hegrenaes L, Hatle L 1985. Non-invasive estimate of valve area in patients with aortic stenosis by Doppler ultrasound and two-dimensional echocardiography. Circulation 72 810–818. (doi:10.1161/01.CIR.72.4.810)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lancellotti P, Pibarot P, Chambers J et al 2016. Recommendations for the imaging assessment of prosthetic heart valves. A report from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging endorsed by the Chinese Society of Echocardiography, the Interamerican Society of Echocardiography and the Brazilian Department of Cardiovascular Imaging. European Heart Journal: Cardiovascular Imaging [in press].

    Google Scholar 

  3. Levy F, Donal E, Biere L, Szmanski C, Remadi JP, Flecher E, Fouquet O, Leguerrier A, Tribouilloy C 2014. Hemodynamic performance during exercise of the new St Jude Trifecta aortic bioprosthesis: results from a French multicenter study. Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography 27 590–597. (doi:10.1016/j.echo.2014.01.022)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bavaria JE, Desai ND, Cheung A, Petracek MR, Groh MA, Borger MA, Schaff HV 2014. The St Jude Medical Trifecta aortic pericardial valve: results from a global, multicenter, prospective clinical study. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 147 590–597. (doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.12.087)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Permanyer E, Estigarribia A-J, Ysasi A, Herrero E, Semper O, Llorens R 2013. St Jude Medical Trifecta™ aortic valve perioperative performance in 200 patients. Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery 17 1–4. (doi:10.1093/icvts/ivt270)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ugur M, Byrne JG, Bavaria JE, Cheung A, Petracek M, Groh MA, Suri RM, Borger MA, Schaff HV 2014. Suture technique does not affect hemodynamic performance of the small supra-annular Trifecta bioprosthesis. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 148 1347–1351. (doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.12.006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Zoghbi WA, Chambers JB, Dumesnil JG, Foster E, Gottdiener JS, Grayburn PA, Khandheria BK, Levine RA, Marx GR, Miller FA Jr et al 2009. American Society of Echocardiography recommendations for evaluation of prosthetic valves with two-dimensional and Doppler echocardiography. Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography 22 975–1014. (doi:10.1016/j.echo.2009.07.013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Phan K, Ha H, Phan S, Misfeld M, Di Eusanio M, Yan TD 2015. Early hemodynamic performance of the third generation St Jude Trifecta aortic prosthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 149 1567–1575. (doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.01.043)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Wendt D, Thielmann M, Plicht B, Assmann J, Price V, Neuhauser M, Jakob H 2014. The new St Jude Trifecta versus Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna and Magna Ease aortic bioprosthesis: is there a hemodynamic superiority? Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 147 1553–1560. (doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.05.045)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dell’Aquila A, Sclarb D, Schneider S, Sindermann J, Hoffmeier A, Kaleshke G, Martens S, Rukosujew A 2013. Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after implantation of the Trifecta aortic bioprosthesis: an initial single-centre experience. Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery 16 112–115. (doi:10.1093/icvts/ivs460)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Colli A, Marchetto G, Salizzoni S, Rinaldi M, Di Marco L, Pacini D, Di Bartolomeo R, Nicolini F, Gherli T, Agrifoglio M et al 2016. The TRIBECA study: ((TRI)fecta (B)ioprosthesis (E)valuation vs (C)arpentier Magna-Ease in (A)ortic position. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery 49 478–485. (doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezv070)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chambers J, Rajani R, Parkin D, Rimington H, Blauth C, Venn G, Young C, Roxbugh J 2008. Bovine pericardial versus porcine stented replacement aortic valves: early results of a randomised comparison of the Perimount and the Mosaic valves. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 136 1142–1148. (doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.12.086)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chambers JB, Rimington HM, Hodson F, Rajani R, Blauth CI 2006. The subcoronary Toronto stentless versus supra-annular Perimount stented replacement aortic valve. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 131 878–882. (doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.11.021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chambers J, Dolman W, Jawetz J, Ramos A, Collaco J, Barros-Pena J 2000. An echocardiographic description of the Sulzer Carbomedics Synergy ST (Labcor) porcine valve in the aortic position. Journal of Heart Valve Disease 9 661–666.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Chambers J, Ely J 2000. A comparison of the classical and modified forms of the continuity equation in the On-X prosthetic heart valve in the aortic position. Journal of Heart Valve Disease 9 299–302.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

St Jude Medical funded the research nurse for the period of this study but played no part in the design, execution or writing of the project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cardiothoracic Centre, Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospitals, London, UK

    John B. Chambers MD FACC, Denise Parkin RGN, James Roxburgh FRCS, Vinayak Bapat FRCS & Christopher Young FRCS

Authors
  1. John B. Chambers MD FACC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Denise Parkin RGN
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James Roxburgh FRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Vinayak Bapat FRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christopher Young FRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John B. Chambers MD FACC.

Rights and permissions

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chambers, J.B., Parkin, D., Roxburgh, J. et al. A comparison of two forms of the continuity equation in the Trifecta bovine pericardial aortic valve. Echo Res Pract 3, 25–28 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1530/ERP-16-0007

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1530/ERP-16-0007

Key Words

Echo Research & Practice

ISSN: 2055-0464

Contact us