dc.contributor.author | Vaquerizo, Beatriz | |
dc.contributor.author | Spaziano, Marco | |
dc.contributor.author | Alali, Juwairia | |
dc.contributor.author | Mylote, Darren | |
dc.contributor.author | Theriault-Lauzier, Pascal | |
dc.contributor.author | Alfagih, Rashed | |
dc.contributor.author | Martucci, Giuseppe | |
dc.contributor.author | Buithieu, Jean | |
dc.contributor.author | Piazza, Nicolo | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-09-20T16:27:37Z | |
dc.date.available | 2018-09-20T16:27:37Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2015-10-01 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Vaquerizo, Beatriz; Spaziano, Marco; Alali, Juwairia; Mylote, Darren; Theriault-Lauzier, Pascal; Alfagih, Rashed; Martucci, Giuseppe; Buithieu, Jean; Piazza, Nicolo (2015). Three-dimensional echocardiography vs. computed tomography for transcatheter aortic valve replacement sizing. European Heart Journal – Cardiovascular Imaging 17 (1), 15-23 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 2047-2404,2047-2412 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10379/14272 | |
dc.description.abstract | Aims The accuracy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) sizing using three-dimensional transoesophageal echocardiography (3D-TEE) compared with the gold-standard multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT) remains unclear. We compare aortic annulus measurements assessed using these two imaging modalities.
Methods and results We performed a single-centre prospective cohort study, including 53 consecutive patients undergoing TAVR, who had both MSCT and 3D-TEE for aortic annulus sizing. Aortic annular dimensions, expected transcatheter heart valve (THV) oversizing, and hypothetical valve size selection based on CT and TEE were compared. 3D-TEE and CT cross-sectional mean diameter (r = 0.69), perimeter (r = 0.70), and area (r = 0.67) were moderately to highly correlated (all P-values <0.0001). 3D-TEE-derived measurements were significantly smaller compared with MSCT: perimeter (68.6 +/- 5.9 vs. 75.1 +/- 5.7 mm, respectively; P < 0.0001); area (345.6 +/- 64.5 vs. 426.9 +/- 68.9 mm(2), respectively; P < 0.0001). The percentage difference between 3D-TEE and MSCT measurements was around 9%. Agreement between MSCT- and 3D-TEE-based THV sizing (perimeter) occurred in 44% of patients. Using the 3D-TEE perimeter annular measurements, up to 50% of patients would have received an inappropriate valve size according to manufacturer-recommended, area-derived sizing algorithms.
Conclusion Aortic annulus measurements for pre-procedural TAVR assessment by 3D-TEE are significantly smaller than MSCT. In this study, such discrepancy would have resulted in up to 50% of all patients receiving the wrong THV size. 3D-TEE should be used for TAVR sizing, only when MSCT is not available or contraindicated. The clinical impact of this information requires further study. | |
dc.publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) | |
dc.relation.ispartof | European Heart Journal – Cardiovascular Imaging | |
dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland | |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ie/ | |
dc.subject | transcatheter aortic valve replacement | |
dc.subject | three-dimensional (3d) transoesophageal echocardiography | |
dc.subject | multi-slice computed tomography | |
dc.subject | transesophageal echocardiography | |
dc.subject | paravalvular regurgitation | |
dc.subject | consensus document | |
dc.subject | implantation | |
dc.subject | recommendations | |
dc.subject | prosthesis | |
dc.subject | corevalve | |
dc.subject | annulus | |
dc.subject | multicenter | |
dc.subject | stenosis | |
dc.title | Three-dimensional echocardiography vs. computed tomography for transcatheter aortic valve replacement sizing | |
dc.type | Article | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1093/ehjci/jev238 | |
dc.local.publishedsource | https://academic.oup.com/ehjcimaging/article-pdf/17/1/15/7463257/jev238.pdf | |
nui.item.downloads | 0 | |