Challenges of recognizing bicuspid aortic valve in elderly patients undergoing TAVR.
Age Factors
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Aortic Valve
/ abnormalities
Aortic Valve Stenosis
/ diagnostic imaging
Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease
Calcinosis
/ diagnostic imaging
Echocardiography
Female
Heart Valve Diseases
/ complications
Humans
Male
Multidetector Computed Tomography
Multimodal Imaging
Predictive Value of Tests
Reproducibility of Results
Retrospective Studies
Severity of Illness Index
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
Aortic stenosis
Bicuspid aortic valve
Echocardiography
MDCT
TAVR
Journal
The international journal of cardiovascular imaging
ISSN: 1875-8312
Titre abrégé: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100969716
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2020
Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
27
07
2019
accepted:
17
09
2019
pubmed:
7
10
2019
medline:
12
3
2020
entrez:
7
10
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Recognition of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) may be challenging in elderly patients with heavily calcified aortic valves undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). In this subset, the diagnostic value of pre-procedural echocardiography in clinical routine is unknown. From a total of 2583 patients undergoing TAVR in our center, we determined the rate of BAV detected by routine echocardiography as documented in the medical records. Pre-procedural multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) images were retrospectively analyzed for the presence of BAV and served as reference standard. Using MDCT criteria, BAV was found in 235 (9.1%) (age 80.1 years [interquartile range 76.4; 83.4], 44.3% female). Of these, only 27/235 (11.5%) had been identified as BAV according to echocardiography reports, whereas 6/2348 (0.3%) with TAV had been wrongly diagnosed as BAV (p < 0.001; sensitivity 11.5%, specificity 99.7%). Correct diagnosis of BAV by echocardiography was more likely when transesophageal echocardiography was available (odds ratio (OR) 5.12 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.22; 11.80]; p < 0.001) and the reader was experienced (OR 5.28 [95% CI 1.55; 18.04]; p = 0.008). Furthermore, correct diagnosis of BAV was more likely in bicommissural-type BAV (OR 2.22 [95% CI 0.90; 5.48]; p = 0.08), whereas heavy aortic valve calcification lead to misdiagnosis (OR 0.39 [95% CI 0.14; 1.06]; p = 0.07). In elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis that are candidates for TAVR, the presence of BAV may be considerably underestimated when relying solely on routine echocardiography. This underlines the value of MDCT for the screening of BAV in this patient population.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31587128
doi: 10.1007/s10554-019-01704-8
pii: 10.1007/s10554-019-01704-8
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
251-256Références
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 May 30;69(21):2579-2589
pubmed: 28330793
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Apr 25;9(8):817-824
pubmed: 27101906
N Engl J Med. 2019 May 2;380(18):1695-1705
pubmed: 30883058
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017 Sep;10(9):
pubmed: 28877885
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Oct;195(4):895-9
pubmed: 20858815
N Engl J Med. 2000 Aug 31;343(9):611-7
pubmed: 10965007
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 May 5;65(17):1786-99
pubmed: 25777629
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018 Oct;11(10):1539-1540
pubmed: 29454778
Eur Heart J. 2019 Oct 7;40(38):3156-3165
pubmed: 31230081
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016 Oct;9(10):1145-1158
pubmed: 27372022
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Jan;28(1):171-82
pubmed: 21222037
Osaka City Med J. 2013 Dec;59(2):69-78
pubmed: 24575582
Clin Res Cardiol. 2017 Dec;106(12):995-1004
pubmed: 28795259