| Literature DB >> 26474984 |
Dominika Suchá1, Steven A J Chamuleau2, Petr Symersky3, Matthijs F L Meijs4, Renee B A van den Brink5, Bas A J M de Mol6, Willem P Th M Mali7, Jesse Habets7, Lex A van Herwerden8, Ricardo P J Budde7,9.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Recent studies have proposed additional multidetector-row CT (MDCT) for prosthetic heart valve (PHV) dysfunction. References to discriminate physiological from pathological conditions early after implantation are lacking. We present baseline MDCT findings of PHVs 6 weeks post implantation.Entities:
Keywords: Diagnostic imaging; Echocardiography; Heart valve prosthesis; Multidetector-row computed tomography; Reference standard
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26474984 PMCID: PMC4778148 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-3918-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Radiol ISSN: 0938-7994 Impact factor: 5.315
Patient characteristics at baseline
| Study subjects | Patients | |
|---|---|---|
| Age, mean ± SD | 61 ± 12 | |
| Male, n (%) | 37 (80 %) | |
| Prior myocardial infarction | 1 (2 %) | |
| Prior cardiac surgery | 8 (17 %) | |
| BMI, mean ± SD | 27.3 ± 4.8 | |
| BSA | 1.98 ± 0.22 | |
| Concomitant bypass surgery | 10 (22 %) | |
| Concomitant other procedure | 15 (33 %) | |
| Medication at discharge | ||
| Vitamin K antagonists | 43 (94 %) | |
| Antiplatelet drugs | 16 (35 %) | |
| Rate control drugs | 39 (85 %) | |
| PHV type implanted, n (%) | Aortic, N = 40 (82 %) | Mitral, N = 9 (18 %) |
| St. Jude Medical | 8 (20 %) | 4 (44 %) |
| Carbomedics | 11 (28 %) | 1 (11 %) |
| ON-X | 3 (8 %) | 2 (22 %) |
| Sorin Bicarbon | 3 (8 %) | 1 (11 %) |
| Perimount (biological) | 11 (28 %) | 1 (11 %) |
| Mitroflow (biological) | 4 (10 %) | - |
| PHV size | ||
| 21 mm | 2 (5 %) | - |
| 23 mm | 18 (45 %) | - |
| 25 mm | 13 (33 %) | 2 (22 %) |
| 27 mm | 6 (15 %) | 2 (22 %) |
| 29 mm | 1 (3 %) | 1 (11 %) |
| 31 mm | - | 3 (33 %) |
| 33 mm | - | 1 (11 %) |
BMI body mass index, BSA body surface area, PHV prosthetic heart valve, SD standard deviation
Transthoracic echocardiography results: patient characteristics 6 weeks after prosthetic valve implantation
| TTE | Aortic PHV = 40 | Mitral PHV = 9 |
|---|---|---|
| Effective orifice area*, mean ± SD | 2.00 ± 0.64 | 2.05 ± 0.41 |
| Mean transprosthetic gradient, median [IQR] | 9.4 [6.0–12.7] | 5.8 [4.1–6.6] |
| Peak transprosthetic gradient | 17.5 [12.2–27.1] | 14.7 [7.7–17.4] |
| Periprosthetic regurgitation, n (%) | ||
| None | 38 (95 %) | 9 (100 %) |
| Trace | 1 (3 %) | - |
| Mild | 1 (3 %) | - |
| Moderate | - | - |
| Severe | - | - |
| Prosthetic regurgitation | ||
| Normal for PHV | 38 (95 %) | 9 (100 %) |
| Trace | 1 (3 %) | - |
| Mild | - | - |
| Moderate | 1 (3 %) | - |
| Severe | - | - |
PHV prosthetic heart valve, TTE transthoracic echocardiography
* Based on the Doppler continuity equation and measured left ventricular outflow tract diameter
† Graded according to clinical routine based on mean and peak gradients, effective orifice area, cardiac output and available PHV type and size specific reference values
Fig. 1Example of biological and mechanical prosthetic heart valve imaging. Transthoracic echocardiography images (a, c) and multidetector-row computed tomography images (b, d) of a normal functioning Perimount 25-mm biological valve (a, b) and a normal functioning Carbomedics 23-mm mechanical heart valve (c, d) in the aortic position
Multidetector-row computed tomography mechanical valve leaflet angles as measured and compared to manufacturers’ values
| Opening angles (°)* | Closing angles (°)* | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aortic | Δ leaflets† | Mitral | Δ leaflets | MFR | Aortic | Δ leaflets† | Mitral | Δ leaflets | MFR | |
| St. Jude, 19–25 mm | 84 (82–88) | 4 (1–6) | n/a | n/a | 85 | 30 (26–34) | 5 (3–7) | n/a | n/a | 30 |
| St. Jude, 27–31 mm | 85 (83–87) | 2 (1–4) | 83 (80–85) | 3 (1–5) | 85 | 23 (22–27) | 3 (0–5) | 23 (22–27) | 2 (0–5) | 25 |
| Carbomedics | 80 (72–82) | 2 (0–3) | 73 (72–74) | 2 (–) | 78 | 24 (20–28) | 3 (0–7) | 24 (22–27) | 5 (–) | 25 |
| Sorin Bicarbon | 79 (78–80) | 1 (1) | 78 (77–78) | 1 (–) | 80 | 21 (19–22) | 1 (1–3) | 20 (19–20) | 1 (–) | 20 |
| On-X | 79 (76–84) | 4 (1–6) | 76 (75–80) | 4 (2–6) | 90 | 40 (39–42) | 1 (0–2) | 40 (39–41) | 1 (1) | 40 |
MFR manufacturer, n/a not available
* Median and total range (minimum–maximum) in degrees provided
† Median difference between the both leaflet angles of a specific prosthetic heart valve in each single patient
Fig. 2Additional findings with multidetector-row computed tomography. (a) Example of a patient with a slightly tilted position of an aortic Perimount prosthesis. (b) Prominent pleural haematoma (35 Hounsfield Units; arrowhead) and pericardial haematoma (31 Hounsfield Units; arrow) in a patient 6 weeks after implantation of the aortic St. Jude valve. (c) Prominent pericardial effusion (stars) at 6 weeks’ follow-up after biological Perimount implantation in the aortic position. (d-f) Multidector-row computed tomography (MDCT) images of the proximal ascending aorta in the short axis view in a patient without evident induration of the periaortic fat tissue (d), with moderate induration (e; empty arrowheads) and with severe induration of the periaortic tissue (f; empty arrowheads)
Fig. 3Unexpected pathology detected with MDCT imaging. Multidector-row computed tomography (MDCT) images of a 69-year-old male patient 6 weeks after aortic Perimount 23-mm implantation (a-c). Note the presence of the subprosthetic hypodense tissue (arrowhead) on both the in-plane (b) and the perpendicular plane image (c). Differential diagnosis: retracted annulus, native valve remnant or small thrombus. Transthoracic echocardiography did not detect any abnormalities in this patient. The stars in the image indicate the presence of polytetrafluoroethylene felt pledgets
Fig. 4Detection of a pseudoaneurysm. Multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT) detected a pseudoaneurysm on the supraprosthetic site near the former left and non-coronary cusp in a 74-year-old male patient 6 weeks after aortic Perimount 25-mm implantation. The pseudoaneurysm (arrowheads) of approximately 22 × 9 × 13 mm is presented on the in-plane (a) and the perpendicular plane MDCT views (b, c). No pathology or periprosthetic regurgitation was found with transthoracic echocardiography. LCA left coronary artery
Fig. 5Unexpected pathology requiring redo valve surgery. Fifty-one-year old female patient after valve replacement surgery with the mechanical St. Jude 23-mm prosthesis in aortic position. Multidetector-row computed tomography imaging (a-c) showed extended pseudoaneurysm formation (arrowheads) and valve dehiscence eventually requiring redo surgery. Transthoracic echocardiography detected only a trace of periprosthetic regurgitation, stated as clinically not relevant
Morphological prosthetic valve assessment by multidetector-row computed tomography
| Aortic PHV | Mitral PHV | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mechanical N = 25 | Biological N = 15 | Mechanical N = 8 | Biological N = 1 | |
| Pledgets visible, n (%) | 17 (68 %) | 12 (80 %) | 6 (75 %) | 1 (100 %) |
| Periaortic fat tissue induration | 22 (88 %) | 11 (73 %) | n/a | n/a |
| Leaflet thickening | - | - | - | - |
| Thrombus | - | - | - | - |
| Subprosthetic tissue | - | 1 (7 %) | - | - |
| Vegetations | - | - | - | - |
| Abscesses | - | - | - | - |
| Pseudoaneurysms | 1 (4 %) | 1 (7 %) | - | - |
| Valve dehiscence | 1 (4 %) | - | - | - |
| Valve angulation* | 1 (4 %) | 2 (13 %) | - | - |
| Abnormal pericardial effusion | 1 (4 %) | 2 (13 %) | - | - |
| Pericardial haeamatoma | 2 (8 %) | 1 (7 %) | - | - |
n/a not applicable, PHV prosthetic heart valve
* To the left ventricular outflow tract axis