The left atrial appendage morphology and gender differences by multi-detector computed tomography in an Egyptian population.
Cardiac computed tomography
Left atrial appendage
Left atrium
Journal
The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology
ISSN: 2090-911X
Titre abrégé: Egypt Heart J
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9106952
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 Jul 2020
02 Jul 2020
Historique:
received:
14
08
2019
accepted:
19
06
2020
entrez:
4
7
2020
pubmed:
4
7
2020
medline:
4
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The left atrial appendage (LAA) is the main source of thromboembolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Unique LAA morphologies have been associated with the risk of thromboembolism. This study investigates the LAA anatomy in the Egyptian population using cardiac multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT). We included 252 consecutive patients presenting for coronary computed tomography angiography in 2 tertiary centers in Egypt in the period from January to July 2017. Patients with atrial fibrillation, valvular affection, or left ventricular dysfunction were excluded. Two and three-dimensional cardiac MDCT images were assessed for LAA morphology, volume, length, and orifice position. The distribution of LAA morphologies was windsock (32.5%), chicken wing (25.4%), cauliflower (22.6%), and cactus (19.4%). Differences in the LAA dimensions in the 4 morphological variants were described. Females were less likely to have a chicken wing LAA morphology compared to males (7.9% vs 34.7%, p value < 0.01), and had a larger LAA volume, smaller LAA length, and a higher prevalence of high LAA orifice position. The most common LAA morphology in our study population is windsock, which may represent the Egyptian population or patients in sinus rhythm. Females were less likely to have a chicken wing LAA morphology, and had a larger LAA volume, smaller length, and higher incidence of high orifice position. Clinical correlation into the translation of these differences into thromboembolic risk is required.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The left atrial appendage (LAA) is the main source of thromboembolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Unique LAA morphologies have been associated with the risk of thromboembolism. This study investigates the LAA anatomy in the Egyptian population using cardiac multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT).
RESULTS
RESULTS
We included 252 consecutive patients presenting for coronary computed tomography angiography in 2 tertiary centers in Egypt in the period from January to July 2017. Patients with atrial fibrillation, valvular affection, or left ventricular dysfunction were excluded. Two and three-dimensional cardiac MDCT images were assessed for LAA morphology, volume, length, and orifice position. The distribution of LAA morphologies was windsock (32.5%), chicken wing (25.4%), cauliflower (22.6%), and cactus (19.4%). Differences in the LAA dimensions in the 4 morphological variants were described. Females were less likely to have a chicken wing LAA morphology compared to males (7.9% vs 34.7%, p value < 0.01), and had a larger LAA volume, smaller LAA length, and a higher prevalence of high LAA orifice position.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The most common LAA morphology in our study population is windsock, which may represent the Egyptian population or patients in sinus rhythm. Females were less likely to have a chicken wing LAA morphology, and had a larger LAA volume, smaller length, and higher incidence of high orifice position. Clinical correlation into the translation of these differences into thromboembolic risk is required.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32617719
doi: 10.1186/s43044-020-00072-2
pii: 10.1186/s43044-020-00072-2
pmc: PMC7332588
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
38Références
Int J Cardiol. 2015 Jun 1;188:86-8
pubmed: 25889335
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995 Feb;25(2):452-9
pubmed: 7829800
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2015 Sep;26(9):922-927
pubmed: 25959871
J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2012 Aug;34(2):173-9
pubmed: 22119857
PLoS One. 2017 Mar 13;12(3):e0173703
pubmed: 28288200
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2010 Sep;21(9):973-82
pubmed: 20550614
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014 Dec;7(12):1251-65
pubmed: 25496544
Circ J. 2015;79(8):1706-11
pubmed: 25959433
PLoS One. 2014 Jul 02;9(7):e101580
pubmed: 24988467
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013 Apr;29(4):935-44
pubmed: 23197275
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012 Aug 7;60(6):531-8
pubmed: 22858289
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 04;9(3):e90903
pubmed: 24595515
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 09;10(3):e0118822
pubmed: 25751618
Heart Rhythm. 2014 Dec;11(12):2239-46
pubmed: 25128733
Heart Rhythm. 2014 Jan;11(1):2-7
pubmed: 24120872
Heart Rhythm. 2013 Jun;10(6):921-5
pubmed: 23384894
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018 Feb;34(2):321-328
pubmed: 28808846
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016 Jan;17(1):59-66
pubmed: 25944049
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017 May;33(5):623-633
pubmed: 28012051