The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare the in vitro and flow dynamics of the Magna (MB) and the Magna Ease aortic valve bioprosthesis (MEB) within the ascending aorta. A 2D-particle-image-velocimetry (2D-PIV) study was performed to compare the flow dynamics induced by each pericardial Carpentier-Edwards Magna and Magna Ease aortic valve prosthesis in the aortic flow field directly behind the valve. Both prostheses (diameter 23 mm) were placed inside an artificial aorta under pulsatile flow conditions (70 Hz and 70 ml stroke volume). The flow field was evaluated according to velocity, shear strength, and vorticity. Both prostheses showed a jet flow type profile with a maximum velocity of 0.97±0.09 m/s for MB and 0.83±1.8 m/s for MEB. Flow fields of both valves were similar in acceleration, peak flow deceleration and leakage phase. Maximum shear strength was 20,285±11,774 l/s2 for MB and 17,006±8453 l/s2 for MEB. Vorticity was nearly similar for counterclockwise and clockwise rotation in both prostheses, but slightly higher with MB (251±41 l/s and -250±39 l/s vs. 225±48 l/s and -232±48 l/s). The point-of-interest (POI)-analysis revealed a higher velocity for left-sided aortic wall compared to right-sided at MB (0.12±0.09 m/s vs. 0.18±0.10 m/s, p<0.001), but was consistent at MEB (0.09±0.05 m/s vs. 0.08±0.04 m/s, p=0.508), respectively. Velocity, shear strength and vorticity in an in vitro test set-up are lower with MEB compared to MB, thus resulting in improved flow dynamics with a similar flow field, which might have a positive influence on blood rheology and potential valve degeneration.
©2012 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston