Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging 8/2020

01-08-2020 | Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation | Original Paper

MDCT planning of trans catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): determination of optimal c-arm angulation

Authors: Benjamin Mehier, Benjamin Dubourg, Hélène Eltchaninoff, Eric Durand, Christophe Tron, Alain Cribier, Paul Michelin, Jean-Nicolas Dacher

Published in: The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging | Issue 8/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

A fluoroscopic view perpendicular to the aortic valve annulus is required during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for obtaining an optimal deployment of the bioprosthesis. By predicting c-arm angulation, pre-procedural MDCT could decrease the number of aortograms, shorten the time of the procedure and reduce the amount of intra-arterial contrast agent. The aim of our study was to assess the accuracy of MDCT in predicting c-arm angulation at the cath. lab. In this single center study, we investigated MDCT prediction of c-arm angulation in patients having undergone a TAVI procedure using SAPIEN 3® (Edwards Lifesciences, USA). Prior to the procedure, an experienced radiologist had reported the angulation using dedicated software (CTreport). After the procedure, a blinded experienced radiologist retrospectively measured the angles using the same method (CTstudy). Interobserver variability was drawn from the comparison between CTreport and CTstudy. Then, the mean angular difference between the predicted MDCT angles (CTstudy) was compared to the working view recorded at the cath. lab. Seventy-nine patients (M/F = 0.65; mean age: 85.2 years ± 5.3) were included. Interobserver variability was 5.9 ± 6.1°. The mean absolute difference between MDCT and fluoroscopy was 8.8 ± 7.1°. The present study showed that MDCT could predict the coplanar fluoroscopic angles prior to TAVI using a balloon-expandable bioprosthesis Sapien 3® placed via a transfemoral approach with a mean angular difference of 8.8 ± 7.1°. Reproducibility was considered good as the mean difference between two independent measures was 5.9 ± 6.1°.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Iung B, Baron G, Butchart EG et al (2003) A prospective survey of patients with valvular heart disease in Europe: The Euro Heart Survey on Valvular Heart Disease. Eur Heart J 24:1231–1243CrossRef Iung B, Baron G, Butchart EG et al (2003) A prospective survey of patients with valvular heart disease in Europe: The Euro Heart Survey on Valvular Heart Disease. Eur Heart J 24:1231–1243CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ et al (2011) Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 364:2187–2198CrossRef Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ et al (2011) Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 364:2187–2198CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ et al (2017) 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J 38:2739–2791CrossRef Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ et al (2017) 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J 38:2739–2791CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ et al (2016) Transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med 374(17):1609–1620CrossRef Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ et al (2016) Transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med 374(17):1609–1620CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Masson J-B, Kovac J, Schuler G et al (2009) Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: review of the nature, management, and avoidance of procedural complications. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2:811–820CrossRef Masson J-B, Kovac J, Schuler G et al (2009) Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: review of the nature, management, and avoidance of procedural complications. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2:811–820CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Samim M, Stella PR, Agostoni P et al (2013) Automated 3D analysis of pre-procedural MDCT to predict annulus plane angulation and C-arm positioning: benefit on procedural outcome in patients referred for TAVR. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 6:238–248CrossRef Samim M, Stella PR, Agostoni P et al (2013) Automated 3D analysis of pre-procedural MDCT to predict annulus plane angulation and C-arm positioning: benefit on procedural outcome in patients referred for TAVR. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 6:238–248CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Hell MM, Biburger L, Marwan M et al (2016) Prediction of fluoroscopic angulations for transcatheter aortic valve implantation by CT angiography: influence on procedural parameters. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 18:906–914 Hell MM, Biburger L, Marwan M et al (2016) Prediction of fluoroscopic angulations for transcatheter aortic valve implantation by CT angiography: influence on procedural parameters. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 18:906–914
8.
go back to reference Achenbach S, Delgado V, Hausleiter J, Schoenhagen P, Min JK, Leipsic JA (2012) SCCT expert consensus document on computed tomography imaging before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) / transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 6:366–380CrossRef Achenbach S, Delgado V, Hausleiter J, Schoenhagen P, Min JK, Leipsic JA (2012) SCCT expert consensus document on computed tomography imaging before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) / transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 6:366–380CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Blanke P, Weir-McCall JR, Achenbach S et al (2019) Computed tomography imaging in the context of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)/transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2:1–24CrossRef Blanke P, Weir-McCall JR, Achenbach S et al (2019) Computed tomography imaging in the context of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)/transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2:1–24CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Wollschläger H, Lee P, Zeiher A, Solzbach U, Bonzel T, Just H (1986) Mathematical tools for spatial computations with biplane isocentric X-ray equipment. Biomed Tech (Berl) 31:101–106CrossRef Wollschläger H, Lee P, Zeiher A, Solzbach U, Bonzel T, Just H (1986) Mathematical tools for spatial computations with biplane isocentric X-ray equipment. Biomed Tech (Berl) 31:101–106CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Tzikas A, Schultz C, Van Mieghem NM, de Jaegere PPT, Serruys PW (2010) Optimal projection estimation for transcatheter aortic valve implantation based on contrast-aortography: Validation of a Prototype Software. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 76:602–607CrossRef Tzikas A, Schultz C, Van Mieghem NM, de Jaegere PPT, Serruys PW (2010) Optimal projection estimation for transcatheter aortic valve implantation based on contrast-aortography: Validation of a Prototype Software. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 76:602–607CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Arnold M, Achenbach S, Pfeiffer I et al (2012) A method to determine suitable fluoroscopic projections for transcatheter aortic valve implantation by computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 6:422–428CrossRef Arnold M, Achenbach S, Pfeiffer I et al (2012) A method to determine suitable fluoroscopic projections for transcatheter aortic valve implantation by computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 6:422–428CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Leipsic J, Gurvitch R, LaBounty TM et al (2011) Multidetector computed tomography in transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 4:416–429CrossRef Leipsic J, Gurvitch R, LaBounty TM et al (2011) Multidetector computed tomography in transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 4:416–429CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Veulemans V, Zeus T, Kleinebrecht L et al (2016) Comparison of manual and automated preprocedural segmentation tools to predict the annulus plane angulation and C-Arm positioning for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. PLoS ONE 11:e0151918CrossRef Veulemans V, Zeus T, Kleinebrecht L et al (2016) Comparison of manual and automated preprocedural segmentation tools to predict the annulus plane angulation and C-Arm positioning for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. PLoS ONE 11:e0151918CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Kasel AM, Cassese S, Leber AW, von Scheidt W, Kastrati A (2013) Fluoroscopy-guided aortic root imaging for TAVR: « follow the right cusp » rule. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 6:274–275CrossRef Kasel AM, Cassese S, Leber AW, von Scheidt W, Kastrati A (2013) Fluoroscopy-guided aortic root imaging for TAVR: « follow the right cusp » rule. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 6:274–275CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Piazza N, de Jaegere P, Schultz C, Becker AE, Serruys PW, Anderson RH (2008) Anatomy of the aortic valvar complex and its implications for transcatheter implantation of the aortic valve. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 1:74–81CrossRef Piazza N, de Jaegere P, Schultz C, Becker AE, Serruys PW, Anderson RH (2008) Anatomy of the aortic valvar complex and its implications for transcatheter implantation of the aortic valve. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 1:74–81CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Binder RK, Leipsic J, Wood D et al (2012) Prediction of optimal deployment projection for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: angiographic 3-dimensional reconstruction of the aortic root versus multidetector computed tomography. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 5:247–252CrossRef Binder RK, Leipsic J, Wood D et al (2012) Prediction of optimal deployment projection for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: angiographic 3-dimensional reconstruction of the aortic root versus multidetector computed tomography. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 5:247–252CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Kerner A, Abadi S, Dotan R, Javitt M, Aronson D, Lessick J (2017) Automatic estimation of optimal deployment of transcatheter aortic valve implantation using computed tomography. J Heart Valve Dis 26:130–138PubMed Kerner A, Abadi S, Dotan R, Javitt M, Aronson D, Lessick J (2017) Automatic estimation of optimal deployment of transcatheter aortic valve implantation using computed tomography. J Heart Valve Dis 26:130–138PubMed
20.
go back to reference Kurra V, Kapadia SR, Tuzcu EM et al (2010) Pre-procedural imaging of aortic root orientation and dimensions: comparison between X-ray angiographic planar imaging and 3-dimensional multidetector row computed tomography. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 3(1):105–113CrossRef Kurra V, Kapadia SR, Tuzcu EM et al (2010) Pre-procedural imaging of aortic root orientation and dimensions: comparison between X-ray angiographic planar imaging and 3-dimensional multidetector row computed tomography. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 3(1):105–113CrossRef
Metadata
Title
MDCT planning of trans catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): determination of optimal c-arm angulation
Authors
Benjamin Mehier
Benjamin Dubourg
Hélène Eltchaninoff
Eric Durand
Christophe Tron
Alain Cribier
Paul Michelin
Jean-Nicolas Dacher
Publication date
01-08-2020
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging / Issue 8/2020
Print ISSN: 1569-5794
Electronic ISSN: 1875-8312
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-020-01846-0

Other articles of this Issue 8/2020

The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging 8/2020 Go to the issue