3D-printed stenotic aortic valve model to simulate physiology before, during, and after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. (15th August 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Zelis, Jo M.; Meiburg, Roel; Roijen, Jorn J.D.; Janssens, Koen L.P.M.; van 't Veer, Marcel; Pijls, Nico H.J.; Johnson, Nils P.; van de Vosse, Frans N.; Tonino, Pim A.L.; Rutten, Marcel C.
• Is Part Of: International journal of cardiology. Volume 313(2020)
• Page Start: 32
• Page End: 34
• Publication Date: 2020-08-15
• Subjects: AS aortic stenosis -- CT computed tomography -- LV left ventricular -- TAVI transcatheter aortic valve implantation; Aortic valve stenosis -- Physiology -- In-vitro simulation -- Transcatheter aortic valve implantation; Cardiology -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 616.12
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.04.087
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0167-5273

Abstract

Abstract: Aims: Pressure loss versus transvalvular flow analysis challenges physiologic models of current aortic valve stenosis. New conceptual frameworks are needed to explain these real-world observations. Methods and results: A patient-specific, 3D-printed, silicon model of a stenotic valve was placed inside an in-vitro haemodynamic model of the circulatory system. Instantaneous pressure and flow in the aorta and left ventricle were simulated according to measured patient specific parameters. Thereafter, a realistic transcatheter aortic valve was implanted (TAVI) in the model. Simulated post-TAVI mean pressure gradients resembled patient observations (3.7 ± 0.7 mmHg vs 6.7 ± 2.3 mmHg), but pre-TAVI measurements underestimated the pressure gradient (35.1 ± 0.6 mmHg vs 45.3 ± 1.5 mmHg). Conclusion: Patient-specific 3D-printed stenotic aortic valve models could simulate baseline haemodynamics. A TAVI procedure was successfully performed on the 3D silicone rubber valve in a physiologic in-vitro model. Pre-TAVI haemodynamics in the model underestimated in-patient mean pressure gradient, whereas post TAVI pressure gradient was predicted correctly with the TAVI valve inside the 3D printed model. This study shows that these types of models could be used to study AS hemodynamics with the TAVI valve inside the 3D printed model. Improvements in the 3D-printed model, like addition of calcification and fine-tuning of the haemodynamic model, could further enhance accuracy of the simulation. Highlights: New conceptual frameworks are needed to explain aortic stenosis physiology. Patient specific 3D-printed silicon model was placed in a haemodynamic model. Pre- and post-TAVI haemodynamics could reasonably be simulated. This could be used as a physiology based TAVI training tool. Printing calcifications could provide more realistic aortic stenosis simulations.