Literature DB >> 26887376

Cyclic changes in area- and perimeter-derived effective dimensions of the aortic annulus measured with multislice computed tomography and comparison with metric intraoperative sizing.

Won-Keun Kim1,2, Alexander Meyer3, Helge Möllmann4, Andreas Rolf4, Susanne Möllmann4, Johannes Blumenstein4, Arnaud Van Linden3, Christian W Hamm4,5, Thomas Walther3, Jörg Kempfert3.   

Abstract

AIMS: Multislice computed tomography (MSCT) is recommended for annular sizing prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), but it remains unclear whether systolic or diastolic reconstructions should be used and whether the effective annular diameter should be derived by area or perimeter. In this study these different approaches were compared with intraoperative sizing.
METHODS: In 52 patients who were evaluated but deemed unsuitable for TAVI, the annulus was measured during conventional surgery using metric sizers (AnnOp) and compared with MSCT measurements (cross-sectional diameter derived by area [AnnAsys, AnnAdia; AnnAmean = (AnnAsys + AnnAdia)/2] and perimeter (AnnPsys, AnnPdia) in systole and diastole). Furthermore, TAVI was simulated based on AnnOp and the impact of the various MSCT approaches on sizing strategy was determined.
RESULTS: The best agreement with AnnOp [mean difference (limits of agreement)] was shown for AnnAmean [0.03 mm (-1.9 to 1.96)], whereas the strongest deviation was noted for AnnPsys [-1.08 mm (-3.01 to 0.86)]. Mean differences between systole and diastole were significant but small: 0.82 mm (3.5 %) for area- and 0.81 mm (3.3 %) for perimeter-derived measurements. Simulation of TAVI revealed the least change of strategy for AnnAmean (76.9 %) as compared with AnnPsys (53.8 %); between AnnAsys and AnnAdia sizing would have been deviant in 17.3 % due to relatively large intraindividual cyclic differences.
CONCLUSIONS: AnnAmean demonstrated the best agreement with AnnOp, whereas perimeter-derived measurements were somewhat overestimated. Despite a negligible average difference between systolic and diastolic annular values, in a subset of patients the intraindividual cyclic variability was relatively large and potentially of clinical impact.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Annulus; Aortic stenosis; MSCT; TAVI

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26887376     DOI: 10.1007/s00392-016-0971-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol        ISSN: 1861-0684            Impact factor:   5.460


  23 in total

1.  Deformation dynamics and mechanical properties of the aortic annulus by 4-dimensional computed tomography: insights into the functional anatomy of the aortic valve complex and implications for transcatheter aortic valve therapy.

Authors:  Ashraf Hamdan; Victor Guetta; Eli Konen; Orly Goitein; Amit Segev; Ehud Raanani; Dan Spiegelstein; Ilan Hay; Elio Di Segni; Michael Eldar; Ehud Schwammenthal
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2012-01-10       Impact factor: 24.094

2.  Aortic annulus sizing: echocardiographic versus computed tomography derived measurements in comparison with direct surgical sizing.

Authors:  Jörg Kempfert; Arnaud Van Linden; Lukas Lehmkuhl; Ardawan J Rastan; David Holzhey; Johannes Blumenstein; Friedrich W Mohr; Thomas Walther
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2012-03-07       Impact factor: 4.191

3.  Dynamism of the aortic annulus: Effect of diastolic versus systolic CT annular measurements on device selection in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Authors:  Darra T Murphy; Philipp Blanke; Shalan Alaamri; Christopher Naoum; Ronen Rubinshtein; Gregor Pache; Bruce Precious; Adam Berger; Rekha Raju; Danny Dvir; David A Wood; John Webb; Jonathon A Leipsic
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr       Date:  2015-07-26

4.  Preoperative assessment of aortic annulus dimensions: comparison of noninvasive and intraoperative measurement.

Authors:  Alexey Dashkevich; Philipp Blanke; Matthias Siepe; Gregor Pache; Mathias Langer; Christian Schlensak; Friedhelm Beyersdorf
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 4.330

5.  Comparison of aortic annulus size by transesophageal echocardiography and computed tomography angiography with direct surgical measurement.

Authors:  Hanghang Wang; Jennifer M Hanna; Asvin Ganapathi; Jeffrey E Keenan; Lynne M Hurwitz; John P Vavalle; Todd L Kiefer; Andrew Wang; J Kevin Harrison; G Chad Hughes
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 2.778

6.  Conformational pulsatile changes of the aortic annulus: impact on prosthesis sizing by computed tomography for transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Philipp Blanke; Maximillian Russe; Jonathon Leipsic; Jochen Reinöhl; Ullrich Ebersberger; Pal Suranyi; Matthias Siepe; Gregor Pache; Mathias Langer; U Joseph Schoepf
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 11.195

7.  Anatomical and procedural features associated with aortic root rupture during balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Marco Barbanti; Tae-Hyun Yang; Josep Rodès Cabau; Corrado Tamburino; David A Wood; Hasan Jilaihawi; Phillip Blanke; Raj R Makkar; Azeem Latib; Antonio Colombo; Giuseppe Tarantini; Rekha Raju; Ronald K Binder; Giang Nguyen; Melanie Freeman; Henrique B Ribeiro; Samir Kapadia; James Min; Gudrun Feuchtner; Ronen Gurtvich; Faisal Alqoofi; Marc Pelletier; Gian Paolo Ussia; Massimo Napodano; Fabio Sandoli de Brito; Susheel Kodali; Bjarne L Norgaard; Nicolaj C Hansson; Gregor Pache; Sergio J Canovas; Hongbin Zhang; Martin B Leon; John G Webb; Jonathon Leipsic
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2013-06-07       Impact factor: 29.690

8.  Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography angiography for the detection of coronary artery disease in patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Authors:  Maksymilian P Opolski; Won-Keun Kim; Christoph Liebetrau; Claudia Walther; Johannes Blumenstein; Luise Gaede; Jörg Kempfert; Arnaud Van Linden; Thomas Walther; Christian W Hamm; Helge Möllmann
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2015-01-06       Impact factor: 5.460

9.  Role of multislice computed tomography in transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  David A Wood; Laurens F Tops; John R Mayo; Sanjeevan Pasupati; Martin J Schalij; Karin Humphries; May Lee; Abdullah Al Ali; Brad Munt; Rob Moss; Christopher R Thompson; Jeroen J Bax; John G Webb
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2009-05-01       Impact factor: 2.778

10.  Prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the Edwards SAPIEN™ prosthesis.

Authors:  Arnaud Van Linden; Jörg Kempfert; Johannes Blumenstein; Ardawan Rastan; David Holzhey; Sven Lehmann; Friedrich W Mohr; Thomas Walther
Journal:  Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2012-07-12       Impact factor: 1.827

View more
  10 in total

1.  Comparison of outcomes using balloon-expandable versus self-expanding transcatheter prostheses according to the extent of aortic valve calcification.

Authors:  Won-Keun Kim; Johannes Blumenstein; Christoph Liebetrau; Andreas Rolf; Luise Gaede; Arnaud Van Linden; Mani Arsalan; Mirko Doss; Jan G P Tijssen; Christian W Hamm; Thomas Walther; Helge Möllmann
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 5.460

2.  Right ventricular fistula post-TAVR: amenable to interventional closure treatment.

Authors:  Petra Hoppmann; Ralf Dirschinger; Martin Greif; Sabine Bleiziffer; Karl-Ludwig Laugwitz; Christian Kupatt
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 5.460

3.  Optimal pre-TAVR annulus sizing in patients with bicuspid aortic valve: area-derived perimeter by CT is the best-correlated measure with intraoperative sizing.

Authors:  Yuan Wang; Moyang Wang; Guanyuan Song; Wei Wang; Bin Lv; Hao Wang; Yongjian Wu
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  3D echocardiographic analysis of aortic annulus for transcatheter aortic valve replacement using novel aortic valve quantification software: Comparison with computed tomography.

Authors:  Anuj Mediratta; Karima Addetia; Diego Medvedofsky; Robert J Schneider; Eric Kruse; Atman P Shah; Sandeep Nathan; Jonathan D Paul; John E Blair; Takeyoshi Ota; Husam H Balkhy; Amit R Patel; Victor Mor-Avi; Roberto M Lang
Journal:  Echocardiography       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 1.724

5.  Aortic annulus measurement with computed tomography angiography reduces aortic regurgitation after transfemoral aortic valve replacement compared to 3-D echocardiography: a single-centre experience.

Authors:  Nadja Wystub; Laura Bäz; Sven Möbius-Winkler; Tudor C Pörner; Björn Goebel; Ali Hamadanchi; Torsten Doenst; Julia Grimm; Lukas Lehmkuhl; Ulf Teichgräber; P Christian Schulze; Marcus Franz
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2019-04-10       Impact factor: 5.460

6.  Patient-specific registration of 3D CT angiography (CTA) with X-ray fluoroscopy for image fusion during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) increases performance of the procedure.

Authors:  I Vernikouskaya; W Rottbauer; J Seeger; B Gonska; V Rasche; Jochen Wöhrle
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2018-02-16       Impact factor: 5.460

7.  Structural Responses of Integrated Parametric Aortic Valve in an Electro-Mechanical Full Heart Model.

Authors:  Adi Morany; Karin Lavon; Danny Bluestein; Ashraf Hamdan; Rami Haj-Ali
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2020-07-23       Impact factor: 3.934

Review 8.  3D transoesophageal echocardiography in the TAVI sizing arena: should we do it and how do we do it?

Authors:  Caroline Bleakley; Mehdi Eskandari; Mark Monaghan
Journal:  Echo Res Pract       Date:  2017-03

Review 9.  The Pivotal Role of Imaging in TAVR Procedures.

Authors:  Caroline Bleakley; Mark J Monaghan
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2018-02-12       Impact factor: 2.931

10.  Do CTA measurements of annular diameter, perimeter and area result in different TAVI prosthesis sizes?

Authors:  Barbora Horehledova; Casper Mihl; Babs M F Hendriks; Nienke G Eijsvoogel; Jindrich Vainer; Leo F Veenstra; Joachim E Wildberger; Marco Das
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2018-06-16       Impact factor: 2.357

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.