Cargando…
Computer-based comparison of different methods for selecting mitral annuloplasty ring size
BACKGROUND: Ring sizing for mitral valve annuloplasty is conventionally done intraoperatively using specific ‘sizer’ instruments, which are placed onto the valve tissue. This approach is barely reproducible since different sizing strategies have been established among surgeons. The goal of this stud...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5282721/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28137288 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13019-017-0571-y |
_version_ | 1782503379180716032 |
---|---|
author | Al-Maisary, Sameer Engelhardt, Sandy Graser, Bastian Wolf, Ivo Karck, Matthias De Simone, Raffaele |
author_facet | Al-Maisary, Sameer Engelhardt, Sandy Graser, Bastian Wolf, Ivo Karck, Matthias De Simone, Raffaele |
author_sort | Al-Maisary, Sameer |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Ring sizing for mitral valve annuloplasty is conventionally done intraoperatively using specific ‘sizer’ instruments, which are placed onto the valve tissue. This approach is barely reproducible since different sizing strategies have been established among surgeons. The goal of this study is to virtually apply different sizing methods on the basis of pre-repair echocardiography to find out basic differences between sizing strategies. METHODS: In three-dimensional echocardiographs of 43 patients, the mitral annulus and the contour of the anterior mitral leaflet were segmented using MITK Mitralyzer software. Similarly, three-dimensional virtual models of Carpentier-Edwards Physio II annuloplasty rings and their corresponding sizers were interactively generated from computer tomography images. For each patient, the matching annuloplasty ring was selected repeatedly according to popular sizing strategies, such as the height of anterior mitral leaflet, the intercommissural distance and the surface area of anterior mitral leaflet. The areas of the selected rings were considered as the neo-surface area of the mitral annulus after implantation. RESULTS: The sizing of the mitral valve according to the height of anterior mitral leaflet (mean ring size = 29.9 ± 3.90), intercommissural distance (mean ring size = 37.5 ± 1.92) or surface area of anterior mitral leaflet (mean ring size = 32.7 ± 3.3) led to significantly different measurements (p ≤ 0.01). In contrary to intercommissural distance, height and surface area of the anterior mitral leaflet exhibited significant variations between the patients (p ≤ 0.01). The sizing according to the height of anterior mitral leaflet led to the maximal reduction of the mitral annulus surface area followed by the sizing according to the surface area of anterior mitral leaflet and finally by the intercommissural distance. CONCLUSIONS: This novel comprehensive computer-based analysis reveals that the surveyed sizing methods led to the selection of significantly different annuloplasty rings and therefore underscore the ambiguity of routinely applied annuloplasty sizing strategies. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13019-017-0571-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5282721 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-52827212017-02-03 Computer-based comparison of different methods for selecting mitral annuloplasty ring size Al-Maisary, Sameer Engelhardt, Sandy Graser, Bastian Wolf, Ivo Karck, Matthias De Simone, Raffaele J Cardiothorac Surg Research Article BACKGROUND: Ring sizing for mitral valve annuloplasty is conventionally done intraoperatively using specific ‘sizer’ instruments, which are placed onto the valve tissue. This approach is barely reproducible since different sizing strategies have been established among surgeons. The goal of this study is to virtually apply different sizing methods on the basis of pre-repair echocardiography to find out basic differences between sizing strategies. METHODS: In three-dimensional echocardiographs of 43 patients, the mitral annulus and the contour of the anterior mitral leaflet were segmented using MITK Mitralyzer software. Similarly, three-dimensional virtual models of Carpentier-Edwards Physio II annuloplasty rings and their corresponding sizers were interactively generated from computer tomography images. For each patient, the matching annuloplasty ring was selected repeatedly according to popular sizing strategies, such as the height of anterior mitral leaflet, the intercommissural distance and the surface area of anterior mitral leaflet. The areas of the selected rings were considered as the neo-surface area of the mitral annulus after implantation. RESULTS: The sizing of the mitral valve according to the height of anterior mitral leaflet (mean ring size = 29.9 ± 3.90), intercommissural distance (mean ring size = 37.5 ± 1.92) or surface area of anterior mitral leaflet (mean ring size = 32.7 ± 3.3) led to significantly different measurements (p ≤ 0.01). In contrary to intercommissural distance, height and surface area of the anterior mitral leaflet exhibited significant variations between the patients (p ≤ 0.01). The sizing according to the height of anterior mitral leaflet led to the maximal reduction of the mitral annulus surface area followed by the sizing according to the surface area of anterior mitral leaflet and finally by the intercommissural distance. CONCLUSIONS: This novel comprehensive computer-based analysis reveals that the surveyed sizing methods led to the selection of significantly different annuloplasty rings and therefore underscore the ambiguity of routinely applied annuloplasty sizing strategies. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13019-017-0571-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-01-30 /pmc/articles/PMC5282721/ /pubmed/28137288 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13019-017-0571-y Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Al-Maisary, Sameer Engelhardt, Sandy Graser, Bastian Wolf, Ivo Karck, Matthias De Simone, Raffaele Computer-based comparison of different methods for selecting mitral annuloplasty ring size |
title | Computer-based comparison of different methods for selecting mitral annuloplasty ring size |
title_full | Computer-based comparison of different methods for selecting mitral annuloplasty ring size |
title_fullStr | Computer-based comparison of different methods for selecting mitral annuloplasty ring size |
title_full_unstemmed | Computer-based comparison of different methods for selecting mitral annuloplasty ring size |
title_short | Computer-based comparison of different methods for selecting mitral annuloplasty ring size |
title_sort | computer-based comparison of different methods for selecting mitral annuloplasty ring size |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5282721/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28137288 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13019-017-0571-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT almaisarysameer computerbasedcomparisonofdifferentmethodsforselectingmitralannuloplastyringsize AT engelhardtsandy computerbasedcomparisonofdifferentmethodsforselectingmitralannuloplastyringsize AT graserbastian computerbasedcomparisonofdifferentmethodsforselectingmitralannuloplastyringsize AT wolfivo computerbasedcomparisonofdifferentmethodsforselectingmitralannuloplastyringsize AT karckmatthias computerbasedcomparisonofdifferentmethodsforselectingmitralannuloplastyringsize AT desimoneraffaele computerbasedcomparisonofdifferentmethodsforselectingmitralannuloplastyringsize |