Superiority of novel automated assessment of aortic annulus by intraoperative three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography in patients with severe aortic stenosis: Comparison with conventional cross-sectional assessment
•The novel automated software reduced analytical time for aortic annular measurements.•Semi-automated measurements of aortic annulus were accurate and reproducible.•Valve sizing based on the automated software corresponded well to operator's choice. Previous studies have demonstrated that three...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of cardiology 2018-10, Vol.72 (4), p.321-327 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | •The novel automated software reduced analytical time for aortic annular measurements.•Semi-automated measurements of aortic annulus were accurate and reproducible.•Valve sizing based on the automated software corresponded well to operator's choice.
Previous studies have demonstrated that three-dimensional (3D) transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is an alternative to multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) for aortic valve sizing in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, conventional cross-sectional analysis of aortic annulus by 3D TEE has some limitations such as lengthy analytical time. A novel software for automated valve measurement has been developed for 3D TEE. We evaluated the accuracy and analytical time of aortic annular measurements using this novel automated software in the clinical setting.
We retrospectively studied 43 patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) who underwent TAVR. All patients underwent intraoperative TEE and MDCT. We measured aortic annular area by automated, semi-automated, and cross-sectional methods using 3D TEE datasets. These measurements were compared to the corresponding MDCT reference values. We also compared the analytical time of the three methods.
Automated and semi-automated analyses required significantly shorter analytical time compared to cross-sectional analysis (automated: 30.1±5.79s, semi-automated: 74.1±15.0s, manual: 81.8±18.5s, p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0914-5087 1876-4738 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.jjcc.2018.02.017 |