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. 1. Department of Cardiology, Kerckhoff Heart and Lung Center, Benekestrasse 2-8, 61231, Bad Nauheim, Germany. w.kim@kerckhoff-klinik.de. 2. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Kerckhoff Heart and Lung Center, Benekestrasse 2-8, 61231, Bad Nauheim, Germany. w.kim@kerckhoff-klinik.de. 3. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Kerckhoff Heart and Lung Center, Benekestrasse 2-8, 61231, Bad Nauheim, Germany. 4. Department of Cardiology, Kerckhoff Heart and Lung Center, Benekestrasse 2-8, 61231, Bad Nauheim, Germany. 5. Department of Cardiology, Justus-Liebig University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany.
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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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