Cargando…

3D-assessment of RVOT dimensions prior percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography versus 3D steady-state free precession sequence

To compare contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (ceMRA) and 3D steady-state free precession (SSFP) during systole and diastole for assessment of the right ventricle outflow tract (RVOT) in patients considered for percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation (PPVI) after tetralogy of Fallot...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ebel, Sebastian, Gottschling, Sebastian, Buzan, Maria T. A., Grothoff, Matthias, Dähnert, Ingo, Wagner, Robert, Gräfe, Daniel, Lurz, Philipp, Gutberlet, Matthias, Lücke, Christian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6669200/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30937683
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10554-019-01578-w
_version_ 1783440330817798144
author Ebel, Sebastian
Gottschling, Sebastian
Buzan, Maria T. A.
Grothoff, Matthias
Dähnert, Ingo
Wagner, Robert
Gräfe, Daniel
Lurz, Philipp
Gutberlet, Matthias
Lücke, Christian
author_facet Ebel, Sebastian
Gottschling, Sebastian
Buzan, Maria T. A.
Grothoff, Matthias
Dähnert, Ingo
Wagner, Robert
Gräfe, Daniel
Lurz, Philipp
Gutberlet, Matthias
Lücke, Christian
author_sort Ebel, Sebastian
collection PubMed
description To compare contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (ceMRA) and 3D steady-state free precession (SSFP) during systole and diastole for assessment of the right ventricle outflow tract (RVOT) in patients considered for percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation (PPVI) after tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) repair. We retrospectively evaluated 89 patients (male: 45, mean age 19 ± 8 years), who underwent cardiac-MRI after surgical TOF-repair. Datasets covering the whole heart in systole and diastole were acquired using ECG-gated 3D SSFP and non-gated ceMRA. Measurements were performed in SSFP-sequences and in ceMRA in the narrowest region of the RVOT to obtain the minimum, maximum and effective diameter. Invasive balloon sizing as the gold standard was available in 12 patients. The minimum diameter in diastolic SSFP, systolic SSFP and ceMRA were 21.4 mm (± 6.1 mm), 22.6 mm (± 6.2 mm) and 22.6 mm (± 6.0 mm), respectively. Maximum diameter was 29.9 mm (± 9.5 mm), 30.0 mm (± 7.0 mm) and 28.8 mm (± 8.1 mm) respectively. The effective diameter was 23.2 mm (± 5.7 mm), 27.4 mm (± 6.7 mm) and 24.4 mm (± 6.2 mm), differing significantly between diastole and systole (p < 0.0001). Measurements in ECG-gated SSFP showed a better inter- and intraobserver variability compared to measurements in non-ECG-gated ceMRA. Comparing invasive balloon sizing with our analysis, we found the highest correlation coefficients for the maximum and effective diameter measured in systolic SSFP (R = 0.99 respectively). ECG-gated 3D SSFP enables the identification and characterization of a potential landing zone for PPVI. The maximum and effective systolic diameter allow precise sizing for PPVI. Patients with TOF-repair could benefit from cardiac MRI before PPVI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6669200
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66692002019-08-14 3D-assessment of RVOT dimensions prior percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography versus 3D steady-state free precession sequence Ebel, Sebastian Gottschling, Sebastian Buzan, Maria T. A. Grothoff, Matthias Dähnert, Ingo Wagner, Robert Gräfe, Daniel Lurz, Philipp Gutberlet, Matthias Lücke, Christian Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Original Paper To compare contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (ceMRA) and 3D steady-state free precession (SSFP) during systole and diastole for assessment of the right ventricle outflow tract (RVOT) in patients considered for percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation (PPVI) after tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) repair. We retrospectively evaluated 89 patients (male: 45, mean age 19 ± 8 years), who underwent cardiac-MRI after surgical TOF-repair. Datasets covering the whole heart in systole and diastole were acquired using ECG-gated 3D SSFP and non-gated ceMRA. Measurements were performed in SSFP-sequences and in ceMRA in the narrowest region of the RVOT to obtain the minimum, maximum and effective diameter. Invasive balloon sizing as the gold standard was available in 12 patients. The minimum diameter in diastolic SSFP, systolic SSFP and ceMRA were 21.4 mm (± 6.1 mm), 22.6 mm (± 6.2 mm) and 22.6 mm (± 6.0 mm), respectively. Maximum diameter was 29.9 mm (± 9.5 mm), 30.0 mm (± 7.0 mm) and 28.8 mm (± 8.1 mm) respectively. The effective diameter was 23.2 mm (± 5.7 mm), 27.4 mm (± 6.7 mm) and 24.4 mm (± 6.2 mm), differing significantly between diastole and systole (p < 0.0001). Measurements in ECG-gated SSFP showed a better inter- and intraobserver variability compared to measurements in non-ECG-gated ceMRA. Comparing invasive balloon sizing with our analysis, we found the highest correlation coefficients for the maximum and effective diameter measured in systolic SSFP (R = 0.99 respectively). ECG-gated 3D SSFP enables the identification and characterization of a potential landing zone for PPVI. The maximum and effective systolic diameter allow precise sizing for PPVI. Patients with TOF-repair could benefit from cardiac MRI before PPVI. Springer Netherlands 2019-04-01 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6669200/ /pubmed/30937683 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10554-019-01578-w Text en © The Author(s) 2019 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.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Ebel, Sebastian
Gottschling, Sebastian
Buzan, Maria T. A.
Grothoff, Matthias
Dähnert, Ingo
Wagner, Robert
Gräfe, Daniel
Lurz, Philipp
Gutberlet, Matthias
Lücke, Christian
3D-assessment of RVOT dimensions prior percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography versus 3D steady-state free precession sequence
title 3D-assessment of RVOT dimensions prior percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography versus 3D steady-state free precession sequence
title_full 3D-assessment of RVOT dimensions prior percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography versus 3D steady-state free precession sequence
title_fullStr 3D-assessment of RVOT dimensions prior percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography versus 3D steady-state free precession sequence
title_full_unstemmed 3D-assessment of RVOT dimensions prior percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography versus 3D steady-state free precession sequence
title_short 3D-assessment of RVOT dimensions prior percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography versus 3D steady-state free precession sequence
title_sort 3d-assessment of rvot dimensions prior percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography versus 3d steady-state free precession sequence
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6669200/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30937683
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10554-019-01578-w
work_keys_str_mv AT ebelsebastian 3dassessmentofrvotdimensionspriorpercutaneouspulmonaryvalveimplantationcomparisonofcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceangiographyversus3dsteadystatefreeprecessionsequence
AT gottschlingsebastian 3dassessmentofrvotdimensionspriorpercutaneouspulmonaryvalveimplantationcomparisonofcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceangiographyversus3dsteadystatefreeprecessionsequence
AT buzanmariata 3dassessmentofrvotdimensionspriorpercutaneouspulmonaryvalveimplantationcomparisonofcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceangiographyversus3dsteadystatefreeprecessionsequence
AT grothoffmatthias 3dassessmentofrvotdimensionspriorpercutaneouspulmonaryvalveimplantationcomparisonofcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceangiographyversus3dsteadystatefreeprecessionsequence
AT dahnertingo 3dassessmentofrvotdimensionspriorpercutaneouspulmonaryvalveimplantationcomparisonofcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceangiographyversus3dsteadystatefreeprecessionsequence
AT wagnerrobert 3dassessmentofrvotdimensionspriorpercutaneouspulmonaryvalveimplantationcomparisonofcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceangiographyversus3dsteadystatefreeprecessionsequence
AT grafedaniel 3dassessmentofrvotdimensionspriorpercutaneouspulmonaryvalveimplantationcomparisonofcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceangiographyversus3dsteadystatefreeprecessionsequence
AT lurzphilipp 3dassessmentofrvotdimensionspriorpercutaneouspulmonaryvalveimplantationcomparisonofcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceangiographyversus3dsteadystatefreeprecessionsequence
AT gutberletmatthias 3dassessmentofrvotdimensionspriorpercutaneouspulmonaryvalveimplantationcomparisonofcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceangiographyversus3dsteadystatefreeprecessionsequence
AT luckechristian 3dassessmentofrvotdimensionspriorpercutaneouspulmonaryvalveimplantationcomparisonofcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceangiographyversus3dsteadystatefreeprecessionsequence