Evaluation of Patients for Percutaneous Edge-to-edge Mitral Valve Repair: Comparison of Cardiac Computed Tomography Angiography With Transesophageal Echocardiography.
Journal
Journal of thoracic imaging
ISSN: 1536-0237
Titre abrégé: J Thorac Imaging
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8606160
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 May 2022
01 May 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
8
7
2021
medline:
22
4
2022
entrez:
7
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We sought to compare parameters derived from cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) with those from transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) for the evaluation of patients with severe mitral regurgitation (MR) before percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (PE2E). TEE is the mainstay for PE2E, although it has specific limitations. CCTA enables measurements in any arbitrary plane with high spatial resolution and offers good calcium visibility. Patients who underwent TEE and CCTA before scheduled PE2E at 2 medical centers were included in this retrospective analysis. Quantitative parameters relevant for PE2E were obtained from TEE and CCTA in a blinded manner and the intrareviewer variability was assessed. All 30 patients (15 female, 76±10 y) had secondary MR attributable to ischemic (60%) or nonischemic cardiomyopathy (40%). On comparing parameters from TEE and CCTA, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter was 60±11 versus 64±11 mm (r=0.90), intercommissural mitral annulus was 35±5 versus 35±5 mm (r=0.88), long-axis annulus was 33±5 versus 33±5 mm (r=0.74), the distance between the fossa ovalis and the leaflet coaptation was 42±5 versus 41±5 mm (r=0.81), the anterior mitral leaflet was 21±6 versus 20±7 mm (r=0.81), the posterior mitral leaflet was 13±2 versus 13±2 mm (r=0.91), and the median mitral calcification was 1 (interquartile range: 0 to 2) versus 0 (interquartile range: 0 to 1; r=0.53), respectively. Intrareviewer agreement was good and excellent for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Our data suggest that evaluation of the mitral valve apparatus with CCTA in patients considered for PE2E is feasible, correlates well with TEE, and offers improved calcium visibility. In selected cases, additional information from CCTA may be helpful for achieving optimal interventional results.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34232143
doi: 10.1097/RTI.0000000000000602
pii: 00005382-202205000-00009
doi:
Substances chimiques
Calcium
SY7Q814VUP
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
187-193Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
M.R. received lecture fees from Abbott. W-.K.K. received proctor/speaker fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Meril. H.M. received lecture fees from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.
Références
Rossi A, Dini FL, Faggiano P, et al. Independent prognostic value of functional mitral regurgitation in patients with heart failure. A quantitative analysis of 1256 patients with ischaemic and non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy. Heart. 2011;97:1675–1680.
Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ, et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2017;38:2739–2791.
Bonow RO, O’Gara PT, Adams DH, et al. 2020 focused update of the 2017 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on the management of mitral regurgitation: a report of the American College of Cardiology Solution Set Oversight Committee. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;75:2236–2270.
Feldman T, Foster E, Glower DD, et al. Percutaneous repair or surgery for mitral regurgitation. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1395–1406.
Feldman T, Kar S, Elmariah S, et al. Randomized comparison of percutaneous repair and surgery for mitral regurgitation: 5-year results of EVEREST II. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:2844–2854.
Stone GW, Lindenfeld J, Abraham WT, et al. Transcatheter mitral-valve repair in patients with heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:2307–2318.
Obadia JF, Messika-Zeitoun D, Leurent G, et al. Percutaneous repair or medical treatment for secondary mitral regurgitation. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:2297–2306.
Maisano F, La Canna G, Colombo A, et al. The evolution from surgery to percutaneous mitral valve interventions: the role of the edge-to-edge technique. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:2174–2182.
Mangold S, Castillo-Sang M, Schoepf UJ, et al. Imaging in minimally invasive mitral valve repair. J Thorac Imaging. 2015;30:378–385.
Hellemans IM, Pieper EG, Ravelli AC, et al. Comparison of transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography with surgical findings in mitral regurgitation. The ESMIR Research Group. Am J Cardiol. 1996;77:728–733.
Bolger AF, Eigler NL, Maurer G. Quantifying valvular regurgitation. Limitations and inherent assumptions of Doppler techniques. Circulation. 1988;78:1316–1318.
Delgado V, Tops LF, Schuijf JD, et al. Assessment of mitral valve anatomy and geometry with multislice computed tomography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:556–565.
Beaudoin J, Thai WE, Wai B, et al. Assessment of mitral valve adaptation with gated cardiac computed tomography: validation with three-dimensional echocardiography and mechanistic insight to functional mitral regurgitation. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;6:784–789.
Rozenshtein A, Boxt LM. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of patients with valvular heart disease. J Thorac Imaging. 2000;15:252–264.
Guo YK, Yang ZG, Ning G, et al. Isolated mitral regurgitation: quantitative assessment with 64-section multidetector CT—comparison with MR imaging and echocardiography. Radiology. 2009;252:369–376.
Zhang L, Qiu J, Yu L, et al. Quantitative assessment of mitral apparatus geometry using dual-source computed tomography in mitral regurgitation. Int Heart J. 2015;56:408–414.
Mahnken AH, Muhlenbruch G, Das M, et al. MDCT detection of mitral valve calcification: prevalence and clinical relevance compared with echocardiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188:1264–1269.
Puri R, Dundon BK, Khurana S, et al. Gross echocardiographic underestimation of mitral valve calcification—a near fatal experience. Int J Cardiol. 2010;143:e24–e26.
Abramowitz Y, Jilaihawi H, Chakravarty T, et al. Mitral annulus calcification. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:1934–1941.
Weininger M, Ritz KS, Schoepf UJ, et al. Interplatform reproducibility of CT coronary calcium scoring software. Radiology. 2012;265:70–77.
Eberhard M, Hinzpeter R, Polacin M, et al. Reproducibility of aortic valve calcification scoring with computed tomography—an interplatform analysis. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2019;13:92–98.
Eberhard M, Schönenberger ALN, Hinzpeter R, et al. Mitral annular calcification in the elderly—quantitative assessment. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2021;15:161–166.
Kriechbaum SD, Boeder NF, Gaede L, et al. Mitral valve leaflet repair with the new PASCAL system: early real-world data from a German multicentre experience. Clin Res Cardiol. 2020;109:549–559.
Dass C, Simpson SA, Steiner RM, et al. Preprocedural computed tomography evaluation for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery: what the surgeon needs to know. J Thorac Imaging. 2015;30:386–396.