-
Something wrong with this record ?
A Comparison of Cardiac Computed Tomography, Transesophageal and Intracardiac Echocardiography, and Fluoroscopy for Planning Left Atrial Appendage Closure
P. Osmancik, D. Herman, H. Linkova, M. Hozman, M. Labos
Language English Country United States
Document type Journal Article
NLK
Free Medical Journals
from 2008
PubMed Central
from 2008 to 2021
Europe PubMed Central
from 2008
Open Access Digital Library
from 2008-01-01
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
Background: Left atrial appendage (LAA) closure (LAAC) is accompanied by a high risk of complications. Due to the complex anatomy of the LAA and the oval-shaped ostium, the proper sizing of the device is often difficult. Purpose: To assess individualized fluoroscopy viewing angles using pre-procedural CT analysis and to compare the results of landing zone measurements obtained from CT, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), intracardiac echocardiography (ICE), and fluoroscopy. Methods: Patients with indications for LAAC were enrolled. Cardiac CT and TEE were done before the procedure; ICE and fluoroscopy measurements were done peri-procedurally. Multiplanar reconstruction of CT images, using FluoroCT software, was done, and optimal "personalized" viewing angles for fluoroscopy were determined. Moreover, a mean (using multiplanar CT reconstruction, derived from the LAA perimetr) amd maximum (using all four imaging modalitities) landing zone (LZ) of the LAA were masured. Results: Twenty-five patients were analyzed. Despite significant correlation between LZs obtained from different imaging modalities, the values of LZs differed significantly; the mean LZ diameter on CT was 20.60 ± 3.42 mm, the maximum diameters were 21.99 ± 4.03 mm (CT), 18.72 ± 2.44 mm (TEE), 18.20 ± 2.68 mm (ICE), and 17.76 ± 3.24 mm (fluoroscopy). The mean CT diameter matched with the final device selection in 92% patients, while fluoroscopy or TEE maximum diameters in only 72% patients. Optimal viewing angles differed significantly from the fluoroscopy projections usually recommended by the manufacturer in 3 patients. Conclusions: CT provides the best measurement of the LZ and the best prediction of the optimum fluoroscopy projections for the implantation procedure.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc22001769
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20220112153715.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 220107s2021 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.4022/jafib.20200449 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)34950349
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Osmancik, Pavel $u Cardiocenter, Dept. of cardiology, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Prague, and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic
- 245 12
- $a A Comparison of Cardiac Computed Tomography, Transesophageal and Intracardiac Echocardiography, and Fluoroscopy for Planning Left Atrial Appendage Closure / $c P. Osmancik, D. Herman, H. Linkova, M. Hozman, M. Labos
- 520 9_
- $a Background: Left atrial appendage (LAA) closure (LAAC) is accompanied by a high risk of complications. Due to the complex anatomy of the LAA and the oval-shaped ostium, the proper sizing of the device is often difficult. Purpose: To assess individualized fluoroscopy viewing angles using pre-procedural CT analysis and to compare the results of landing zone measurements obtained from CT, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), intracardiac echocardiography (ICE), and fluoroscopy. Methods: Patients with indications for LAAC were enrolled. Cardiac CT and TEE were done before the procedure; ICE and fluoroscopy measurements were done peri-procedurally. Multiplanar reconstruction of CT images, using FluoroCT software, was done, and optimal "personalized" viewing angles for fluoroscopy were determined. Moreover, a mean (using multiplanar CT reconstruction, derived from the LAA perimetr) amd maximum (using all four imaging modalitities) landing zone (LZ) of the LAA were masured. Results: Twenty-five patients were analyzed. Despite significant correlation between LZs obtained from different imaging modalities, the values of LZs differed significantly; the mean LZ diameter on CT was 20.60 ± 3.42 mm, the maximum diameters were 21.99 ± 4.03 mm (CT), 18.72 ± 2.44 mm (TEE), 18.20 ± 2.68 mm (ICE), and 17.76 ± 3.24 mm (fluoroscopy). The mean CT diameter matched with the final device selection in 92% patients, while fluoroscopy or TEE maximum diameters in only 72% patients. Optimal viewing angles differed significantly from the fluoroscopy projections usually recommended by the manufacturer in 3 patients. Conclusions: CT provides the best measurement of the LZ and the best prediction of the optimum fluoroscopy projections for the implantation procedure.
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Herman, Dalibor $u Cardiocenter, Dept. of cardiology, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Prague, and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Linkova, Hana $u Cardiocenter, Dept. of cardiology, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Prague, and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic $u Cardiocenter, Karlovy Vary Regional Hospital, Karlovy Vary, Czech Republic $u Dept. of Radiology, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Prague, and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Hozman, Marek $u Cardiocenter, Karlovy Vary Regional Hospital, Karlovy Vary, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Labos, Marek $u Dept. of Radiology, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Prague, and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic
- 773 0_
- $w MED00165295 $t Journal of atrial fibrillation $x 1941-6911 $g Roč. 13, č. 6 (2021), s. 20200449
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34950349 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20220107 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20220112153711 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ind $b bmc $g 1745612 $s 1152916
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2021 $b 13 $c 6 $d 20200449 $e 20210430 $i 1941-6911 $m Journal of atrial fibrillation $n J Atr Fibrillation $x MED00165295
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20220107