EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2020
Screening for transcatheter mitral valve replacement: a decision tree algorithm.
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.
Ludwig Sebastian, Ruebsamen Nicole, Deuschl Florian, Schofer Niklas, Kalbacher Daniel, Schaefer Andreas, Koell Benedikt, Westermann Dirk, Reichenspurner Hermann, Blankenberg Stefan, Schäfer Ulrich, Conradi Lenard, Lubos Edith
Аннотация
AIMS: The high frequency of screening failure for anatomical reasons in patients with severe mitral valve regurgitation (MR) is a limiting factor in the screening process for transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR). However, data on optimal patient selection are scarce. The present study aimed to develop a screening algorithm based on TMVR screening data.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 195 screenings for six different TMVR devices were performed in 94 high-risk patients with severe MR. We compared baseline echocardiographic and multislice computed tomography (MSCT) parameters between the subgroups of patients accepted (N=33) and rejected for TMVR (N=61). Reasons for screening failure were assessed, and a decision tree algorithm was statistically derived. Reasons for screening failure were small LV dimensions (30.6%), small (7.5%) or large (22.5%) annular size, potential risk of LVOT obstruction (22.0%) or mitral annulus calcification (15.6%). A four-step decision tree algorithm to assess TMVR eligibility was developed resulting in an AUC of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.71, 0.89, p<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: This study presents the first screening algorithm to assess anatomical eligibility for TMVR in patients with severe MR, based on simple MSCT criteria. Given the high rate of TMVR screening failure, this algorithm may facilitate the identification of potential TMVR candidates.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 195 screenings for six different TMVR devices were performed in 94 high-risk patients with severe MR. We compared baseline echocardiographic and multislice computed tomography (MSCT) parameters between the subgroups of patients accepted (N=33) and rejected for TMVR (N=61). Reasons for screening failure were assessed, and a decision tree algorithm was statistically derived. Reasons for screening failure were small LV dimensions (30.6%), small (7.5%) or large (22.5%) annular size, potential risk of LVOT obstruction (22.0%) or mitral annulus calcification (15.6%). A four-step decision tree algorithm to assess TMVR eligibility was developed resulting in an AUC of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.71, 0.89, p<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: This study presents the first screening algorithm to assess anatomical eligibility for TMVR in patients with severe MR, based on simple MSCT criteria. Given the high rate of TMVR screening failure, this algorithm may facilitate the identification of potential TMVR candidates.