Comparison of Accuracy of Aortic Root Annulus Assessment With Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Versus Echocardiography and Multidetector Computed Tomography in Patients Referred for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Gianluca Pontone ; Daniele Andreini ; Antonio L. Bartorelli ; Erika Bertella ; Saima Mushtaq ; Paola Gripari ; Monica Loguercio ; Sarah Cortinovis ; Andrea Baggiano ; Edoardo Conte ; Virginia Beltrama ; Andrea Annoni ; Alberto Formenti ; Gloria Tamborini ; Manuela Muratori ; Andrea Guaricci ; Francesco Alamanni ; Giovanni Ballerini ; Mauro Pepi
• 刊名：The American Journal of Cardiology
• 出版年：1 December, 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：112
• 期：11
• 页码：1790-1799
• 全文大小：1915 K

文摘

The evaluation of the aortic root in patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation is crucial. The aim of the present study was to compare the accuracy of cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) evaluation of the aortic annulus (AoA) with transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography and multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) in patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. In 50 patients, maximum diameter, minimum diameter and AoA, length of the left coronary, right coronary, and noncoronary aortic leaflets, degree (grades 1 to 4) of aortic leaflet calcification, and distance between AoA and coronary artery ostia were assessed. AoA maximum diameter, minimum diameter, and area by CMR were 26.4 卤 2.8聽mm, 20.6 卤 2.3聽mm, 449.8 卤 86.2聽mm², respectively. The length of left coronary, right coronary, and noncoronary leaflets by CMR were 13.9 卤 2.2, 13.3 卤 2.1, and 13.4 卤 1.8聽mm, respectively, whereas the score of aortic leaflet calcifications was 2.9 卤 0.8. Finally, the distances between AoA and left main and right coronary artery ostia were 16.1 卤 2.8 and 16.1 卤 4.4 mm, respectively. Regarding AoA area, transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography showed an underestimation (p <0.01), with a moderate agreement (r: 0.5 and 0.6, respectively, p <0.01) compared with CMR. No differences and excellent correlation were observed between CMR and MDCT for all parameters (r: 0.9, p <0.01), except for aortic leaflet calcifications that were underestimated by CMR. In conclusion, aortic root assessment with CMR including AoA size, aortic leaflet length, and coronary artery ostia height is accurate compared with MDCT. CMR may be a valid imaging alternative in patients unsuitable for MDCT.