Cargando…
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: impact of pre-procedural FEops HEARTguide assessment on device size selection in borderline annulus size cases
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate device size selection in patients within the borderline annulus size range undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and to assess if pre-procedural patient-specific computer simulation will lead to the selection of a different device s...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8630271/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34495448 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12471-021-01620-4 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate device size selection in patients within the borderline annulus size range undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and to assess if pre-procedural patient-specific computer simulation will lead to the selection of a different device size than standard of care. BACKGROUND: In TAVR, appropriate device sizing is imperative. In borderline annulus size cases no standardised technique for tailored device size selection is currently available. Pre-procedural patient-specific computer simulation can be used, predicting the risk for paravalvular leakage (PVL) and need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI). METHODS: In this multicentre retrospective study, 140 patients in the borderline annulus size range were included. Hereafter, device size selection was left to the discretion of the operator. After TAVR, in 24 of the 140 patients, patient-specific computer simulation calculated the most appropriate device size expected to give the lowest risk for PVL and need for PPI. In these 24 patients, device size selection based on patient-specific computer simulation was compared with standard-of-care device size selection relying on a standardised matrix (Medtronic). RESULTS: In a significant proportion of the 140 patients (26.4%) a different device size than recommended by the matrix was implanted. In 10 of the 24 patients (41.7%) in whom a computer simulation was performed, a different device size was recommended than by means of the matrix. CONCLUSIONS: Device size selection in patients within the borderline annulus size range is still ambiguous. In these patients, patient-specific computer simulation is feasible and can contribute to a more tailored device size selection. |
---|