Maciej Haberka1, Magdalena Malczewska2, Piotr Pysz2,3, Michał Kozłowski2, Wojciech Wojakowski2, Grzegorz Smolka2. 1. Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Silesia, Ziołowa 45/47, 40-635, Katowice, Poland. mhaberka@op.pl. 2. Department of Cardiology and Structural Heart Diseases, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland. 3. Department of Cardiac Rehabilitation, Treatment and Rehabilitation Center, Long-Term Care Hospital, Jaworze, Poland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Objective assessment of prosthetic paravalvular leak (PVL) is complex and challenging even in transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). Our aim was to assess the value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in quantifying PVL in aortic (AVR) or mitral valve (MVR) replacement. METHODS: Thirty-one patients (62 ± 15.1 years, 63% males) with a preliminary diagnosis of significant PVL (AVR, n-23; MVR, n = 8) were recruited. The TEE PVL grading was based on the semi-quantitative (SQ) TEE according to the VARC II PVL classification (%PVL: mild < 10%; moderate 10%-30%; severe > 30%). Non-contrast CMR studies were acquired at 1.5 T with a quantitative approach (phase-contrast velocity encoded imaging). The CMR PVL severity was classified according to regurgitant fraction (RF: (1) mild ≤ 20%, (2) moderate 21%-39%, or (3) severe ≥ 40%). RESULTS: All patients revealed symptoms of heart failure (71%: New York Heart Association [NYHA] II; 91%: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP] > 150 pg/ml) and typical cardiovascular disease risk factors. The SQ-TEE results revealed several categories: (1) mild (n = 5; 16%), (2) moderate (n = 21; 67%), and (3) severe (n = 5; 16%) PVL. However, CMR PVL RF reclassified the severity of PVL: (1) mild to moderate (in 80%), (2) moderate to severe (in 47%), and (3) severe to moderate (in 40%). The receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that SQ-TEE and CMR PVL-vol and -RF predicted the upper tertile of NT-proBNP (> 2000 pg/ml) with the best sensitivity for CMR parameters. CONCLUSION: The SQ-TEE showed moderate agreement with CMR and underestimated a considerable number of AVR or MVR-PVL.
BACKGROUND: Objective assessment of prosthetic paravalvular leak (PVL) is complex and challenging even in transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). Our aim was to assess the value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in quantifying PVL in aortic (AVR) or mitral valve (MVR) replacement. METHODS: Thirty-one patients (62 ± 15.1 years, 63% males) with a preliminary diagnosis of significant PVL (AVR, n-23; MVR, n = 8) were recruited. The TEE PVL grading was based on the semi-quantitative (SQ) TEE according to the VARC II PVL classification (%PVL: mild < 10%; moderate 10%-30%; severe > 30%). Non-contrast CMR studies were acquired at 1.5 T with a quantitative approach (phase-contrast velocity encoded imaging). The CMR PVL severity was classified according to regurgitant fraction (RF: (1) mild ≤ 20%, (2) moderate 21%-39%, or (3) severe ≥ 40%). RESULTS: All patients revealed symptoms of heart failure (71%: New York Heart Association [NYHA] II; 91%: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP] > 150 pg/ml) and typical cardiovascular disease risk factors. The SQ-TEE results revealed several categories: (1) mild (n = 5; 16%), (2) moderate (n = 21; 67%), and (3) severe (n = 5; 16%) PVL. However, CMR PVL RF reclassified the severity of PVL: (1) mild to moderate (in 80%), (2) moderate to severe (in 47%), and (3) severe to moderate (in 40%). The receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that SQ-TEE and CMR PVL-vol and -RF predicted the upper tertile of NT-proBNP (> 2000 pg/ml) with the best sensitivity for CMR parameters. CONCLUSION: The SQ-TEE showed moderate agreement with CMR and underestimated a considerable number of AVR or MVR-PVL.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance; Echocardiography; Paravalvular leak; Valve prosthesis
Authors: K Hammermeister; G K Sethi; W G Henderson; F L Grover; C Oprian; S H Rahimtoola Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2000-10 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Rebecca T Hahn; Theodore Abraham; Mark S Adams; Charles J Bruce; Kathryn E Glas; Roberto M Lang; Scott T Reeves; Jack S Shanewise; Samuel C Siu; William Stewart; Michael H Picard Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Carlos E Ruiz; Rebecca T Hahn; Alain Berrebi; Jeffrey S Borer; Donald E Cutlip; Greg Fontana; Gino Gerosa; Reda Ibrahim; Vladimir Jelnin; Hasan Jilaihawi; E Marc Jolicoeur; Chad Kliger; Itzhak Kronzon; Jonathon Leipsic; Francesco Maisano; Xavier Millan; Patrick Nataf; Patrick T O'Gara; Philippe Pibarot; Stephen R Ramee; Charanjit S Rihal; Josep Rodes-Cabau; Paul Sorajja; Rakesh Suri; Julie A Swain; Zoltan G Turi; E Murat Tuzcu; Neil J Weissman; Jose L Zamorano; Patrick W Serruys; Martin B Leon Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2018-04-14 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Arie Pieter Kappetein; Stuart J Head; Philippe Généreux; Nicolo Piazza; Nicolas M van Mieghem; Eugene H Blackstone; Thomas G Brott; David J Cohen; Donald E Cutlip; Gerrit-Anne van Es; Rebecca T Hahn; Ajay J Kirtane; Mitchell W Krucoff; Susheel Kodali; Michael J Mack; Roxana Mehran; Josep Rodés-Cabau; Pascal Vranckx; John G Webb; Stephan Windecker; Patrick W Serruys; Martin B Leon Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2012-10-01 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Gregory R Hartlage; Vasilis C Babaliaros; Vinod H Thourani; Salim Hayek; Christina Chrysohoou; Nima Ghasemzadeh; Arthur E Stillman; Stephen D Clements; John N Oshinski; Stamatios Lerakis Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2014-12-05 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Maxwell D Eder; Krishna Upadhyaya; Jakob Park; Matthew Ringer; Maricar Malinis; Bryan D Young; Lissa Sugeng; David J Hur Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2021-12-20
Authors: Michael B Hadley; Francesca Romana Prandi; Francesco Barillà; Samin Sharma; Annapoorna Kini; Stamatios Lerakis Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-08-23