BACKGROUND:Catheter-based mitral valve clip repair (CBMCR) is feasible for selected patients with mitral regurgitation (MR). Two-dimensional (2D) transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is the standard modality for evaluating MR and procedural guidance. Recently, real-time three-dimensional TEE became available. The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of combined 2D and three-dimensional TEE for CBMCR. In evaluating MR for CBMCR, the confidence of interpretation of 2D TEE was compared with that of combined imaging for the localization of major valve pathology. In patients who underwent CBMCR, the outcomes and the duration of CBMCR were compared. METHODS: In this retrospective study, MR evaluation was performed by 2D TEE alone and by combined imaging in 80 and 57 patients, respectively. CBMCR was guided by 2D TEE alone in 20 patients and by combined imaging in 39 patients. RESULTS: Examination by combined imaging allowed en face visualization of mitral valve anatomy and MR jet origin. The confidence of interpretation by combined imaging was higher than for 2D TEE (1.1 ± 0.3 vs 1.8 ± 0.7, P < .001).The guidance of CBMCR by combined imaging facilitated alignment of the catheter trajectory, clip positioning, and orientation of clip arms. The procedural success and final MR grade were not different between the two study groups. However, the procedural time of CBMCR using combined imaging compared with that using 2D TEE guidance alone was shorter (241 ± 58 vs 201 ± 68 min, P = .035). CONCLUSIONS: The use of combined imaging compared with 2D TEE alone appears to enhance the confidence of interpretation concerning mitral pathology and catheter-clip system location and may also reduce CBMCR time.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Catheter-based mitral valve clip repair (CBMCR) is feasible for selected patients with mitral regurgitation (MR). Two-dimensional (2D) transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is the standard modality for evaluating MR and procedural guidance. Recently, real-time three-dimensional TEE became available. The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of combined 2D and three-dimensional TEE for CBMCR. In evaluating MR for CBMCR, the confidence of interpretation of 2D TEE was compared with that of combined imaging for the localization of major valve pathology. In patients who underwent CBMCR, the outcomes and the duration of CBMCR were compared. METHODS: In this retrospective study, MR evaluation was performed by 2D TEE alone and by combined imaging in 80 and 57 patients, respectively. CBMCR was guided by 2D TEE alone in 20 patients and by combined imaging in 39 patients. RESULTS: Examination by combined imaging allowed en face visualization of mitral valve anatomy and MR jet origin. The confidence of interpretation by combined imaging was higher than for 2D TEE (1.1 ± 0.3 vs 1.8 ± 0.7, P < .001).The guidance of CBMCR by combined imaging facilitated alignment of the catheter trajectory, clip positioning, and orientation of clip arms. The procedural success and final MR grade were not different between the two study groups. However, the procedural time of CBMCR using combined imaging compared with that using 2D TEE guidance alone was shorter (241 ± 58 vs 201 ± 68 min, P = .035). CONCLUSIONS: The use of combined imaging compared with 2D TEE alone appears to enhance the confidence of interpretation concerning mitral pathology and catheter-clip system location and may also reduce CBMCR time.
Authors: M A Sherif; L Paranskaya; S Yuecel; S Kische; O Thiele; G D'Ancona; A Neuhausen-Abramkina; J Ortak; H Ince; A Öner Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 2.380