Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Pediatric Cardiology 5/2003

01-09-2003 | Original Article

Pressure Recovery in Pediatric Aortic Valve Stenosis

Authors: R. E. Villavicencio, T. J. Forbes, R. L. Thomas, R. A. Humes

Published in: Pediatric Cardiology | Issue 5/2003

Login to get access

Abstract

This study was designed to evaluate the phenomenon of pressure recovery in pediatric patients with aortic stenosis and also to evaluate how observed differences between catheter and Doppler gradients can be predicted by Doppler echocardiography. Doppler measurements of aortic valve stenosis gradients are known to overestimate observed gradients in the catheterization laboratory. Pressure recovery has been shown to be a contributing factor to this discrepancy. However, the clinical relevance of correcting Doppler gradients using the pressure recovery equation has not been evaluated in the pediatric population. Simultaneously obtained catheter and Doppler gradients were studied in 14 patients (range, 0.03–18 years; mean, 4.1 years) with aortic valve stenosis. A total of 23 data points were measured because 9 patients underwent balloon valvuloplasty and had both a pre- and a post-balloon valvuloplasty data point in the study. The catheter gradients were then compared to peak, mean, and pressure recovery corrected Doppler gradients. Pressure recovery was calculated using a previously validated equation. As expected, measured echocardiographic continuous-wave peak Doppler gradients overestimated the observed catheter gradients (range, 16–93 mmHg; mean, 43 mmHg). The continuous-wave peak Doppler gradients, mean, and pressure recovery adjusted gradients were equally as good in correlating the observed catheter gradients to those obtained by Doppler echocardiography (r = 0.92). However, pressure recovery corrected Doppler gradients were in better agreement with catheter gradients than echocardiographic mean or peak Doppler gradients (95% limit of agreement: −9 to 19 mmHg for pressure recovery corrected gradients, −30 to 11 mmHg for mean Doppler gradients, and 2–83 mmHg for peak Doppler gradients). Measured continuous-wave peak Doppler gradients consistently overestimated catheter gradients. The noted differences may be predicted using the pressure recovery equation. Pressure recovery is a significant factor in children with aortic valve stenosis.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Baumgartner, H, Khan, S, DeRobertis, M, Czer, L, Maurer, G 1990Discrepancies between Doppler and catheter gradients in aortic prosthetic valves in vitro: a manifestation of localized gradients and pressure recovery.Circulation8214671475PubMed Baumgartner, H, Khan, S, DeRobertis, M, Czer, L, Maurer, G 1990Discrepancies between Doppler and catheter gradients in aortic prosthetic valves in vitro: a manifestation of localized gradients and pressure recovery.Circulation8214671475PubMed
2.
go back to reference Baumgartner, H, Schima, H, Tulzer, G, Kühn, P 1993Effect of stenosis geometry on the Doppler–catheter gradient relation in vitro: manifestation of pressure recovery.J Am Coll Cardiol2110181025PubMed Baumgartner, H, Schima, H, Tulzer, G, Kühn, P 1993Effect of stenosis geometry on the Doppler–catheter gradient relation in vitro: manifestation of pressure recovery.J Am Coll Cardiol2110181025PubMed
3.
go back to reference Baumgartner, H, Stefenelli, T, Niederberger, J, Schima, H, Maurer, G 1999“Overestimation” of catheter gradients by Doppler ultrasound in patients with aortic stenosis: a predictable manifestation of pressure recovery.J Am Coll Cardiol616551661CrossRef Baumgartner, H, Stefenelli, T, Niederberger, J, Schima, H, Maurer, G 1999“Overestimation” of catheter gradients by Doppler ultrasound in patients with aortic stenosis: a predictable manifestation of pressure recovery.J Am Coll Cardiol616551661CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Bland, JM, Altman, DG 1986Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurements.Lancet1307311PubMed Bland, JM, Altman, DG 1986Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurements.Lancet1307311PubMed
5.
go back to reference Cape, E, Jones, M, Yamada, I, Van Auker, M, Valdes-Cruz, L 1996Turbulent/viscous interactions control Doppler/catheter pressure discrepancies in aortic stenosis: the role of the Reynolds number.Circulation9429752981PubMed Cape, E, Jones, M, Yamada, I, Van Auker, M, Valdes-Cruz, L 1996Turbulent/viscous interactions control Doppler/catheter pressure discrepancies in aortic stenosis: the role of the Reynolds number.Circulation9429752981PubMed
6.
go back to reference Clark, C 1976The fluid mechanics of aortic stenosis: I. Theory and steady flow experiments.J Biomech9521528PubMed Clark, C 1976The fluid mechanics of aortic stenosis: I. Theory and steady flow experiments.J Biomech9521528PubMed
7.
go back to reference Clark, C 1976The fluid mechanics of aortic stenosis: II. Unsteady flow experiments.J Biomech9567573PubMed Clark, C 1976The fluid mechanics of aortic stenosis: II. Unsteady flow experiments.J Biomech9567573PubMed
8.
go back to reference Currie, P, Seward, J, Reeder, G., et al. 1985Continuous-wave Doppler echocardiographic assessment of severity of calcific aortic stenosis: a simultaneous Doppler–catheter correlative study in 100 adult patients.Circulation7111621169PubMed Currie, P, Seward, J, Reeder, G.,  et al. 1985Continuous-wave Doppler echocardiographic assessment of severity of calcific aortic stenosis: a simultaneous Doppler–catheter correlative study in 100 adult patients.Circulation7111621169PubMed
9.
go back to reference Gutgesell, HP, French, M 1991Echocardiographic determination of aortic and pulmonary valve areas in subjects with normal hearts.Am J Cardiol68773776PubMed Gutgesell, HP, French, M 1991Echocardiographic determination of aortic and pulmonary valve areas in subjects with normal hearts.Am J Cardiol68773776PubMed
10.
go back to reference Heinrich, RS, Fontaine, AA, Grimes, RY, et al. 1996Experimental analysis of fluid mechanical energy losses in aortic valve stenosis: importance of pressure recovery.Ann Biomed Eng24685694PubMed Heinrich, RS, Fontaine, AA, Grimes, RY,  et al. 1996Experimental analysis of fluid mechanical energy losses in aortic valve stenosis: importance of pressure recovery.Ann Biomed Eng24685694PubMed
11.
go back to reference Laskey, W, Kussmaul, W 1994Pressure recovery in aortic valve stenosis.Circulation89116121PubMed Laskey, W, Kussmaul, W 1994Pressure recovery in aortic valve stenosis.Circulation89116121PubMed
12.
go back to reference Lemler, MS, Valdes-Cruz, LM, Shandas, RS, Cape, EG .Insights into catheter/Doppler discrepancies in congenital aortic stenosis.Am J Cardiol8314471450 Lemler, MS, Valdes-Cruz, LM, Shandas, RS, Cape, EG .Insights into catheter/Doppler discrepancies in congenital aortic stenosis.Am J Cardiol8314471450
13.
go back to reference Levine, R, Jimoh, A, Cape, E, et al. 1989Pressure recovery distal to a stenosis: potential cause of gradient “overestimation” by Doppler echocardiography.J Am Coll Cardiol13706715PubMed Levine, R, Jimoh, A, Cape, E,  et al. 1989Pressure recovery distal to a stenosis: potential cause of gradient “overestimation” by Doppler echocardiography.J Am Coll Cardiol13706715PubMed
14.
go back to reference Lima, VC, Zahn, E, Houche, C, et al. 2000Non-invasive determination of the systolic peak to peak gradient in children with aortic stenosis: validation of a mathematical model.Cardiol Young2115119 Lima, VC, Zahn, E, Houche, C,  et al. 2000Non-invasive determination of the systolic peak to peak gradient in children with aortic stenosis: validation of a mathematical model.Cardiol Young2115119
15.
go back to reference Neiderberger, J, Schima, H, Maurer, G, Baumgartner, H 1996Importance of pressure recovery for the assessment of aortic stenosis by Doppler ultrasound: role of aortic size, aortic valve area, and direction of the stenotic jet in vitro.Circulation9419341940PubMed Neiderberger, J, Schima, H, Maurer, G, Baumgartner, H 1996Importance of pressure recovery for the assessment of aortic stenosis by Doppler ultrasound: role of aortic size, aortic valve area, and direction of the stenotic jet in vitro.Circulation9419341940PubMed
16.
go back to reference Ohlsson, J, Wranne, B 1986Noninvasive assessment of valve area in patients with aortic stenosis.J Am Coll Cardiol7501508PubMed Ohlsson, J, Wranne, B 1986Noninvasive assessment of valve area in patients with aortic stenosis.J Am Coll Cardiol7501508PubMed
17.
go back to reference Schöbel, WA, Voelker, W, Haase, KK, Karsch, KR 1999Extent, determinants and clinical importance of pressure recovery in patients with aortic valve stenosis.Eur Heart J2013551363CrossRefPubMed Schöbel, WA, Voelker, W, Haase, KK, Karsch, KR 1999Extent, determinants and clinical importance of pressure recovery in patients with aortic valve stenosis.Eur Heart J2013551363CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Sung, HW, Yu, PS, Hsu, CH, Hsu, JC 1997Can cardiac catheterization accurately assess the severity of aortic stenosis? An in vitro pulsatile flow study.Ann Biomed Eng25896905PubMed Sung, HW, Yu, PS, Hsu, CH, Hsu, JC 1997Can cardiac catheterization accurately assess the severity of aortic stenosis? An in vitro pulsatile flow study.Ann Biomed Eng25896905PubMed
19.
go back to reference Voelker, W, Reul, H, Stelzer, T, Schmidt, A, Karsch, K 1992Pressure recovery in aortic stenosis: an in vitro study in a pulsatile flow model.J Am Coll Cardiol2015851593PubMed Voelker, W, Reul, H, Stelzer, T, Schmidt, A, Karsch, K 1992Pressure recovery in aortic stenosis: an in vitro study in a pulsatile flow model.J Am Coll Cardiol2015851593PubMed
Metadata
Title
Pressure Recovery in Pediatric Aortic Valve Stenosis
Authors
R. E. Villavicencio
T. J. Forbes
R. L. Thomas
R. A. Humes
Publication date
01-09-2003
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Pediatric Cardiology / Issue 5/2003
Print ISSN: 0172-0643
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1971
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00246-002-0361-7

Other articles of this Issue 5/2003

Pediatric Cardiology 5/2003 Go to the issue