Open AccessThree‐Dimensional Echocardiography for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Sizing: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Author(s) -
Rong Lisa Q.,
Hameed Irbaz,
Salemi Arash,
Rahouma Mohamed,
Khan Faiza M.,
Wijeysundera Harindra C.,
Angiolillo Dominick J.,
ShoreLesserson Linda,
BiondiZoccai Giuseppe,
Girardi Leonard N.,
Fremes Stephen E.,
Gaudino Mario
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of the american heart association
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.494
H-Index - 85
ISSN - 2047-9980
DOI - 10.1161/jaha.119.013463
Subject(s) - medicine , valve replacement , ventricular outflow tract , stenosis , regurgitation (circulation) , cardiac skeleton , perimeter , multidetector computed tomography , radiology , cardiology , aortic valve , aortic valve stenosis , receiver operating characteristic , nuclear medicine , computed tomography , aortic valve replacement , geometry , mathematics
Background Transcatheter aortic valve replacement ( TAVR ) is the standard of care for many patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and relies on accurate sizing of the aortic annulus. It has been suggested that 3‐dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (3D TEE) may be used instead of multidetector computed tomography ( MDCT ) for TAVR planning. This systematic review and meta‐analysis compared 3D TEE and MDCT for pre‐ TAVR measurements. Methods and Results A systematic literature search was performed. The primary outcome was the correlation coefficient between 3D TEE– and MDCT‐ measured annular area. Secondary outcomes were correlation coefficients for mean annular diameter, annular perimeter, and left ventricular outflow tract area; interobserver and intraobserver agreements; mean differences between 3D TEE and MDCT measurements; and pooled sensitivities, specificities, and receiver operating characteristic area under curve values of 3 D TEE and MDCT for discriminating post‐ TAVR paravalvular aortic regurgitation. A random effects model was used. Meta‐regression and leave‐one‐out analysis for the primary outcome were performed. Nineteen studies with a total of 1599 patients were included. Correlations between 3D TEE and MDCT annular area, annular perimeter, annular diameter, and left ventricular outflow tract area measurements were strong (0.86 [95% CI , 0.80–0.90]; 0.89 [ CI , 0.82–0.93]; 0.80 [ CI , 0.70–0.87]; and 0.78 [ CI , 0.61–0.88], respectively). Mean differences between 3 D TEE and MDCT between measurements were small and nonsignificant. Interobserver and intraobserver agreement and discriminatory abilities for paravalvular aortic regurgitation were good for both 3 D TEE and MDCT . Conclusions For pre‐ TAVR planning, 3 D TEE is comparable to MDCT . In patients with renal dysfunction, 3 D TEE may be potentially advantageous for TAVR measurements because of the lack of contrast exposure.