Cargando…
Retrospectively ECG-gated helical vs. non-ECG-synchronized high-pitch CTA of the aortic root for TAVI planning
BACKGROUND: Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) plays a key role in patient assessment prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, to date no consensus has been established on what is the optimal pre-procedural imaging protocol. Variability in pre-TAVI acquisition protocol...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7217477/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32396570 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232673 |
_version_ | 1783532606754652160 |
---|---|
author | Horehledova, Barbora Mihl, Casper Boswijk, Ellen Crombag, Genevieve A. J. C. Nijssen, Estelle C. Nelemans, Patty J. Veenstra, Leo F. Wildberger, Joachim E. Das, Marco |
author_facet | Horehledova, Barbora Mihl, Casper Boswijk, Ellen Crombag, Genevieve A. J. C. Nijssen, Estelle C. Nelemans, Patty J. Veenstra, Leo F. Wildberger, Joachim E. Das, Marco |
author_sort | Horehledova, Barbora |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) plays a key role in patient assessment prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, to date no consensus has been established on what is the optimal pre-procedural imaging protocol. Variability in pre-TAVI acquisition protocols may lead to discrepancies in aortic annulus measurements and may potentially influence prosthesis size selection. PURPOSE: The current study evaluates the magnitude of differences in aortic annulus measurements using max-systolic, end-diastolic, and non-ECG-synchronized imaging, as well as the impact of method on prosthesis size selection. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty consecutive TAVI-candidates, who underwent retrospectively-ECG-gated CT angiography (CTA) of the aortic root, directly followed by non-ECG-synchronized high-pitch CT of the entire aorta, were retrospectively included. Aortic root dimensions were assessed at each 10% increment of the R-R interval (0–100%) and on the non-ECG-synchronized scan. Dimensional changes within the cardiac cycle were evaluated using a 1-way repeated ANOVA. Agreement in measurements between max-systole, end-diastole and non-ECG-synchronized scans was assessed with Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: Maximal dimensions of the aortic root structures and minimum annulus-coronary ostia distances were measured during systole. Max-systolic measurements were significantly and substantially larger than end-diastolic (p<0.001) and non-ECG-synchronized measurements (p<0.001). Due to these discrepancies, the three methods resulted in the same prosthesis size selection in only 48–62% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The systematic differences between max-systolic, end-diastolic and non-ECG-synchronized measurements for relevant aortic annular dimensions are both statistically significant and clinically relevant. Imaging strategy impacts prosthesis size selection in nearly half the TAVI-candidates. End-diastolic and non-ECG-synchronized imaging does not provide optimal information for prosthesis size selection. Systolic image acquisition is necessary for assessment of maximal annular dimensions and minimum annulus-coronary ostia distances. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7217477 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72174772020-05-29 Retrospectively ECG-gated helical vs. non-ECG-synchronized high-pitch CTA of the aortic root for TAVI planning Horehledova, Barbora Mihl, Casper Boswijk, Ellen Crombag, Genevieve A. J. C. Nijssen, Estelle C. Nelemans, Patty J. Veenstra, Leo F. Wildberger, Joachim E. Das, Marco PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) plays a key role in patient assessment prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, to date no consensus has been established on what is the optimal pre-procedural imaging protocol. Variability in pre-TAVI acquisition protocols may lead to discrepancies in aortic annulus measurements and may potentially influence prosthesis size selection. PURPOSE: The current study evaluates the magnitude of differences in aortic annulus measurements using max-systolic, end-diastolic, and non-ECG-synchronized imaging, as well as the impact of method on prosthesis size selection. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty consecutive TAVI-candidates, who underwent retrospectively-ECG-gated CT angiography (CTA) of the aortic root, directly followed by non-ECG-synchronized high-pitch CT of the entire aorta, were retrospectively included. Aortic root dimensions were assessed at each 10% increment of the R-R interval (0–100%) and on the non-ECG-synchronized scan. Dimensional changes within the cardiac cycle were evaluated using a 1-way repeated ANOVA. Agreement in measurements between max-systole, end-diastole and non-ECG-synchronized scans was assessed with Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: Maximal dimensions of the aortic root structures and minimum annulus-coronary ostia distances were measured during systole. Max-systolic measurements were significantly and substantially larger than end-diastolic (p<0.001) and non-ECG-synchronized measurements (p<0.001). Due to these discrepancies, the three methods resulted in the same prosthesis size selection in only 48–62% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The systematic differences between max-systolic, end-diastolic and non-ECG-synchronized measurements for relevant aortic annular dimensions are both statistically significant and clinically relevant. Imaging strategy impacts prosthesis size selection in nearly half the TAVI-candidates. End-diastolic and non-ECG-synchronized imaging does not provide optimal information for prosthesis size selection. Systolic image acquisition is necessary for assessment of maximal annular dimensions and minimum annulus-coronary ostia distances. Public Library of Science 2020-05-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7217477/ /pubmed/32396570 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232673 Text en © 2020 Horehledova et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Horehledova, Barbora Mihl, Casper Boswijk, Ellen Crombag, Genevieve A. J. C. Nijssen, Estelle C. Nelemans, Patty J. Veenstra, Leo F. Wildberger, Joachim E. Das, Marco Retrospectively ECG-gated helical vs. non-ECG-synchronized high-pitch CTA of the aortic root for TAVI planning |
title | Retrospectively ECG-gated helical vs. non-ECG-synchronized high-pitch CTA of the aortic root for TAVI planning |
title_full | Retrospectively ECG-gated helical vs. non-ECG-synchronized high-pitch CTA of the aortic root for TAVI planning |
title_fullStr | Retrospectively ECG-gated helical vs. non-ECG-synchronized high-pitch CTA of the aortic root for TAVI planning |
title_full_unstemmed | Retrospectively ECG-gated helical vs. non-ECG-synchronized high-pitch CTA of the aortic root for TAVI planning |
title_short | Retrospectively ECG-gated helical vs. non-ECG-synchronized high-pitch CTA of the aortic root for TAVI planning |
title_sort | retrospectively ecg-gated helical vs. non-ecg-synchronized high-pitch cta of the aortic root for tavi planning |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7217477/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32396570 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232673 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT horehledovabarbora retrospectivelyecggatedhelicalvsnonecgsynchronizedhighpitchctaoftheaorticrootfortaviplanning AT mihlcasper retrospectivelyecggatedhelicalvsnonecgsynchronizedhighpitchctaoftheaorticrootfortaviplanning AT boswijkellen retrospectivelyecggatedhelicalvsnonecgsynchronizedhighpitchctaoftheaorticrootfortaviplanning AT crombaggenevieveajc retrospectivelyecggatedhelicalvsnonecgsynchronizedhighpitchctaoftheaorticrootfortaviplanning AT nijssenestellec retrospectivelyecggatedhelicalvsnonecgsynchronizedhighpitchctaoftheaorticrootfortaviplanning AT nelemanspattyj retrospectivelyecggatedhelicalvsnonecgsynchronizedhighpitchctaoftheaorticrootfortaviplanning AT veenstraleof retrospectivelyecggatedhelicalvsnonecgsynchronizedhighpitchctaoftheaorticrootfortaviplanning AT wildbergerjoachime retrospectivelyecggatedhelicalvsnonecgsynchronizedhighpitchctaoftheaorticrootfortaviplanning AT dasmarco retrospectivelyecggatedhelicalvsnonecgsynchronizedhighpitchctaoftheaorticrootfortaviplanning |