MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.10.033

Медицинская библиотека · JACC. Cardiovascular interventions · 2021

Double S-Curve Versus Cusp-Overlap Technique: Defining the Optimal Fluoroscopic Projection for TAVR With a Self-Expanding Device.

Ben-Shoshan Jeremy, Alosaimi Hind, Lauzier Pascal Thériault, Pighi Michele, Talmor-Barkan Yeela, Overtchouk Pavel, Martucci Giuseppe, Spaziano Marco, Finkelstein Ariel, Gada Hemal, Piazza Nicolo

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess the concordance between transcatheter aortic valve implantation angles generated by the "double S-curve" and "cusp-overlap" techniques.

BACKGROUND

The "double S-curve" and "cusp-overlap" methods aim to define optimal fluoroscopic projections for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a self-expandable device.

METHODS

The study included 100 consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with self-expanding device planned by multidetector computed tomography. TAVR was performed using the double S-curve model, as a view in which both the aortic valve annulus and delivery catheter planes are displayed perpendicularly on fluoroscopy. Optimal projection according to the cusp-overlap technique was retrospectively generated by overlapping the right and left cups on the multidetector computed tomography annular plane. The angular difference between methods was assessed in spherical 3 dimensions and on the left and right anterior oblique (RAO) and cranial and caudal (CAU) axes.

RESULTS

The double S-curve and cusp-overlap methods provided views located in the same quadrant, mostly the RAO and CAU, in 92% of patients with a median 3-dimensional angular difference of 10.0° (interquartile range: 5.5° to 17.9°). The 3-dimensional deviation between the average angulation obtained by each method was not statistically significant (1.49°; p = 0.349). No significant differences in average coordinates were noted between the double S-curve and cusp-overlap methods (RAO: 14.7 ± 15.2 vs. 12.9 ± 12.5; p = 0.36; and CAU: 27.0 ± 9.4 vs. 26.9 ± 10.4; p = 0.90). TAVR using the double S-curve was associated with 98% device success, low complication rate, and absence of moderate-to-severe paravalvular leak.

CONCLUSIONS

The double S-curve and cusp-overlap methods provide comparable TAVR projections, mostly RAO and CAU. TAVR using the double S-curve model is associated with a high rate of device success and low rate of procedural complications.

Для цитирования: Ben-Shoshan Jeremy, Alosaimi Hind, Lauzier Pascal Thériault, Pighi Michele, Talmor-Barkan Yeela, Overtchouk Pavel, Martucci Giuseppe, Spaziano Marco, Finkelstein Ariel, Gada Hemal, Piazza Nicolo. Double S-Curve Versus Cusp-Overlap Technique: Defining the Optimal Fluoroscopic Projection for TAVR With a Self-Expanding Device.. JACC. Cardiovascular interventions. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.10.033.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.