Comparative Study of the Amount of Backflow Produced by Four Types of Aortic Valve Prostheses

[+] Author and Article Information
H. N. Sabbah, P. D. Stein

Department of Medicine (Division of Cardiovascular Medicine), and Department of Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Mich. 48202

J Biomech Eng 106(1), 66-71 (Feb 01, 1984) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.3138459 History: Received March 24, 1982; Revised October 18, 1983; Online June 15, 2009


To determine the extent of backflow encountered with currently used prosthetic valves, four types of aortic valves with comparable orifice diameters were tested in a pulse duplicating system. These were a Hancock porcine valve, a Lillehei-Kaster pivoting disk valve, a St. Jude bileaflet valve and a Björk-Shiley tilting disk valve. Mean aortic pressure was sequentially increased from 83 to 147 mmHg, keeping the pump rate essentially constant (69–73 strokes/min). The porcine valve produced the least amount of total backflow (backflow due to closure plus leakage backflow) (1.6 to 2.4 mL/stroke). Among the mechanical valves the Björk-Shiley valve showed the least amount of total backflow (5.0 to 6.0 mL/stroke). At a mean aortic pressure of 100 mmHg and a low cardiac output of 2 L/min, the total backflow with the porcine valve was only 6 percent of forward flow; whereas it was 19 percent with the Lillehei-Kaster valve, 22 percent with the St. Jude valve and 18 percent with the Björk-Shiley valve. Leakage backflow at a given level of mean aortic pressure was, as expected, directly related to the annular clearance area. It is concluded that the Hancock valve showed the least amount of backward flow, which would be particularly beneficial in low output states. In the presence of normal hemodynamics, the amount of backflow with the three mechanical valves appeared to be well below the level of backflow considered to be clinically significant.

Copyright © 1984 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.





Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In