EMAIL THIS PAGE TO A FRIEND

JACC. Cardiovascular interventions

Erroneous measurement of the aortic annular diameter using 2-dimensional echocardiography resulting in inappropriate CoreValve size selection: a retrospective comparison with multislice computed tomography.


PMID 24947721

Abstract

This study sought to assess the differential adherence to transcatheter heart valve (THV)-oversizing principles between transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and multislice computed tomography (CT) and its impact on the incidence of paravalvular leak (PVL). CT has emerged as an alternative to 2-dimensional TEE for THV sizing. In our early experience, TEE-derived aortic annular diameters determined THV size selection. CT datasets originally obtained for vascular screening were retrospectively interrogated to determine CT-derived annular diameters. Annular dimensions and expected THV oversizing were compared between TEE and CT. The incidence of PVL was correlated to TEE- and CT-based oversizing calculations. Using TEE-derived annulus measurements, 157 patients underwent CoreValve implantation (23 mm: n = 66; 29 mm: n = 91). The estimated THV oversizing on the basis of TEE was 20.1 ± 8.2%. Retrospective CT analysis yielded larger annular diameters than TEE (p < 0.0001). When these CT diameters were used to recalculate the percentage of oversizing achieved with the TEE-selected CoreValve, the actual THV oversizing was only 10.4 ± 7.8%. Consequently, CT analysis suggested that up to 50% of patients received an inappropriate CoreValve size. When CT-based sizing criteria were satisfied, the incidence of PVL was 21% lower than that with echocardiography (14% vs. 35%; p = 0.003). Adherence to CT-based oversizing was independently associated with a reduced incidence of PVL (odds ratio 0.36; 95% confidence interval: 0.14 to 0.90; p = 0.029); adherence to TEE-based sizing was not. Retrospective CT-based annular analysis revealed that CoreValve size selection by TEE was incorrect in 50% of patients. The percentage of oversizing with CT was one-half of that calculated with TEE resulting in the majority of patients receiving a THV that was too small.