Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography : official publication of the American Society of Echocardiography · 2017
Three-Dimensional Measurement of Aortic Annulus Dimensions Using Area or Circumference for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Valve Sizing: Does It Make a Difference?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Papachristidis Alexandros, Papitsas Michael, Roper Damian, Wang Yanzhong, Dworakowski Rafal, Byrne Jonathan, Wendler Olaf, MacCarthy Philip, Monaghan Mark J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is increasing worldwide. We present our 6-year experience using three-dimensional (3D) transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and investigate whether different sizing methods of the aortic annulus lead to different prosthesis size that may impact outcome.
METHODS: We investigated 262 patients who underwent TAVR and had 3D TEE data sets of the aortic annulus. We have used the area-derived diameter (Darea = 2(area/π)) and the circumference-derived diameter (Dcirc = Circumference/π) to size the prosthesis in separate populations in different time periods.
RESULTS: The Dcirc method is correlated with lower incidence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation (PVAR; odds ratio = 0.44, 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.85; P = .015). Other factors associated with PVAR were the cover index, area-mismatch index, and circumference-mismatch index. Retrospectively, for the purposes of the study, we used the Edwards-Sapien 3 Valve 3D sizing guide in all patients, to predict the hypothetical valve size with each method. In the whole population, the calculated Dcirc was higher in all cases (Dcirc = 23.4 ± 2.3 mm vs Darea = 22.9 ± 2.3 mm; P < .001). The two methods had good agreement in predicting the valve size (kappa = 0.600). In total, 192 (73.3%) patients were assigned for the same prosthesis size, whereas 70 (26.7%) would be eligible for a different size, of which 44 (16.7%) would definitely have had a different valve implanted.
CONCLUSION: Using the aortic annulus area or circumference to calculate the annular diameter provides different values. Comparing the two methods, a different prosthesis size could have been implanted in 26.7% of patients. In our series the use of circumference-derived diameter resulted in lower incidence of PVAR. The findings of this study may be independent of the imaging modality and may therefore also apply to computed tomography-based aortic annulus measurements, but this needs to be further investigated.
METHODS: We investigated 262 patients who underwent TAVR and had 3D TEE data sets of the aortic annulus. We have used the area-derived diameter (Darea = 2(area/π)) and the circumference-derived diameter (Dcirc = Circumference/π) to size the prosthesis in separate populations in different time periods.
RESULTS: The Dcirc method is correlated with lower incidence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation (PVAR; odds ratio = 0.44, 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.85; P = .015). Other factors associated with PVAR were the cover index, area-mismatch index, and circumference-mismatch index. Retrospectively, for the purposes of the study, we used the Edwards-Sapien 3 Valve 3D sizing guide in all patients, to predict the hypothetical valve size with each method. In the whole population, the calculated Dcirc was higher in all cases (Dcirc = 23.4 ± 2.3 mm vs Darea = 22.9 ± 2.3 mm; P < .001). The two methods had good agreement in predicting the valve size (kappa = 0.600). In total, 192 (73.3%) patients were assigned for the same prosthesis size, whereas 70 (26.7%) would be eligible for a different size, of which 44 (16.7%) would definitely have had a different valve implanted.
CONCLUSION: Using the aortic annulus area or circumference to calculate the annular diameter provides different values. Comparing the two methods, a different prosthesis size could have been implanted in 26.7% of patients. In our series the use of circumference-derived diameter resulted in lower incidence of PVAR. The findings of this study may be independent of the imaging modality and may therefore also apply to computed tomography-based aortic annulus measurements, but this needs to be further investigated.