| Literature DB >> 31606041 |
Bruce R Boti1,2,3, Vikash G Hindori4, Emilio L Schade5, Athina M Kougioumtzoglou5, Eva C Verbeek4, Annet Driessen-Waaijer6, Riccardo Cocchieri4, Bas A J M de Mol5, Nils R Planken7, Abdullah Kaya5, Henk A Marquering8,7.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Limited aortic annulus exposure during minimal invasive aortic valve replacement (mini-AVR) proves to be challenging and contributes to procedure complexity, resulting in longer procedure times. New innovations like sutureless valves have been introduced to reduce procedure complexity. Additionally, preoperative imaging could also contribute to reducing procedure times. Therefore, we hypothesize that Computed Tomography (CT)-image based measurements are associated with mini-AVR complexity.Entities:
Keywords: Aortic valve replacement; Computed tomography; Imaging; Minimal invasive surgery
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31606041 PMCID: PMC6790021 DOI: 10.1186/s13019-019-0997-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg ISSN: 1749-8090 Impact factor: 1.637
Fig. 1a Anterior (surgical) view of the aorta and ribcage. b Laterosuperior view of the aorta and partial rib cage. The access distance and access angle are determined based on the location of three landmarks: aortic annulus center, sinotubular junction and incision location (manubriosternal joint)
Fig. 2Screenshot of the mini-AVR planning tool. The graphical user interface (GUI) shows the isocontours of the access distance and access angle. The access angle contours are colorized ranging from dark green (small angle) to white (large angle). The access distance contours are colorized ranging from dark blue (short distance) to white (long distance). The quantitative measures are displayed in the legend on the right: the left column of bars for angles and right column for distance
Baseline patient characteristics
| Characteristics | Overall cohort ( |
|---|---|
| Age at surgery (years) | 71 [63, 75] |
| Female gender | 34 (34%) |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | 27 [25, 32] |
| NYHA Functional class ≥ III | 16 (16%) |
| Cardiovascular risk factors | |
| Dyslipidemia | 18 (18%) |
| Hypertension | 54 (54%) |
| Diabetes mellitus | 19 (19%) |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | 12 (12%) |
| Peripheral vascular disease | 5 (5.0%) |
| Previous cerebrovascular accident | 9 (9.0%) |
| Previous transient ischemic attack | 8 (8.0%) |
| Atrial fibrillation | 22 (22%) |
| Severely renal impairment (CC ≤ 50) | 3 (3.0%) |
| Previous history of percutaneous coronary intervention | 10 (10%) |
| Logistic EuroSCORE I | 4.3 [2.9, 6.3] |
| Pre-operative echocardiography | |
| Left ventricular function | |
| Mild dysfunction (LVEF 30–50%) | 10 (10%) |
| Peak aortic transvalvular gradient (mmHg) | 73 ± 22 |
| Aortic Valve Area (cm2) | 0.8 ± 0.2 |
| Aortic valve pathology | |
| Severe aortic stenosis | 84 (84%) |
| Aortic insufficiency grade ≥ III | 4 (4.0%) |
| Aortic stenosis and insufficiency grade ≥ III | 2 (2.0%) |
| Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) | 30 (30%) |
Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation, median [IQR: 25th, 75th percentile] or frequency (%). CC Creatine clearance, EuroSCORE European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation, LVEF Left ventricular ejection fraction, NYHA New York Heart Association
CT measured parameters
| Variables | Mean ± standard deviation | Median [IQR: 25th, 75th percentile] |
|---|---|---|
| Access angle (degrees) | 42 ± 11 | 40 [34, 49] |
| Distance from incision (mm) | 86 ± 12 | 86 [77, 95] |
| Calcium volume (mm3) | 6.9 · 10 2 ± 5.1 · 102 | 6.0 · 102 [2.8, 9.2] · 102 |
| Annulus minimum diameter (mm) | 23.8 ± 3.3 | 23.3 [21.4, 26.0] |
| Annulus maximum diameter (mm) | 29.1 ± 4.1 | 27.8 [27.0, 30.5] |
| Annulus area (mm2) | 5.5 · 102 ± 1.8 · 102 | 5.1 · 102 [4.4, 6.1] · 102 |
| Annulus perimeter (mm) | 8.5 · 101 ± 1.2 · 101 | 8.2 [7.0, 11] · 101 |
Intra operative data
| Variables | Overall cohort ( |
|---|---|
| Isolated aortic valve replacement | 99 (99%) |
| Conversion from mini-AVR to full sternotomy | 1 (1.0%) |
| Non-isolated: Mini-AVR + Aortoplasty | 1 (1.0%) |
| Sutureless valve prostheses | 52 (52%) |
| Diameter of applied valve prosthesis | |
| 21 mm | 5 (5.0%) |
| 23 mm | 23 (23%) |
| 25 mm | 46 (46%) |
| 27 mm | 23 (23%) |
| 29 mm | 3 (3.0%) |
| Cardiopulmonary bypass time (min) | 88 ± 24 |
| Aortic cross-clamp time (min) | 63 ± 21 |
Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation or frequency (%)
Univariable regression models of CT-based characteristics, age and suture technique with outcome measures. Linear regression models of CPB and AoX are presented with β-coefficients and confidence intervals (95%). In addition, for all CT-based characteristics the adjusted β-coefficients and confidence intervals (95%) are presented (corrected for age and suture technique). All values with a p-value < 0.1 are depicted in bold
| β-coefficient (95 CI%) | Adjusted β-coefficient (95 CI%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cardiopulmonary bypass time (min) | ||||
| Access angle (degrees) | −0.082 (− 0.56, 0.40) | 0.74 | − 0.071 (− 0.47, 0.32) | 0.72 |
| Distance from incision (mm) | 0.15 (− 0.26, 0.57) | 0.47 | 0.25 (− 0.096, 0.60) | 0.15 |
| Calcium volume (mm3) |
|
|
| |
| Annulus minimum diameter (mm) |
|
| 0.6 (−1.2, 2.3) | 0.52 |
| Annulus maximum diameter (mm) |
|
| 0.2 (−1.2, 1.6) | 0.77 |
| Annulus area (mm2) |
|
| 0.006 (−0.031, 0.042) | 0.76 |
| Annulus perimeter (mm) |
|
| 0.062 (−0.46, 0.58) | 0.81 |
| Sutureless valve (Yes) |
|
| ||
| Age (year) |
|
| ||
| Aortic cross-clamp time (min) | ||||
| Access angle (degrees) | −0.090 (−0.50, 0.32) | 0.66 | −0.080 (− 0.40, 0.24) | 0.62 |
| Distance from incision (mm) | 0.074 (− 0.28, 0.43) | 0.68 | 0.17 (−0.11, 0.46) | 0.23 |
| Calcium volume (mm3) |
|
|
|
|
| Annulus minimum diameter (mm) |
|
| 1.0 (−0.2, 2.3) | 0.10 |
| Annulus maximum diameter (mm) |
|
| 0.8 (−0.2, 1.8) | 0.13 |
| Annulus area (mm2) |
|
| 0.021 (−0.006, 0.048) | 0.12 |
| Annulus perimeter (mm) |
|
| 0.289 (−0.094, 0.673) | 0.14 |
| Sutureless valve (Yes) |
|
| ||
| Age (year) |
|
| ||