Advertisement

Annular versus supra-annular sizing for transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve disease

Published:January 31, 2020DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2020.01.008

      Abstract

      Background

      CT measurement of supra-annular area (SA) has been proposed as an alternative to annular area (AA) for sizing of trancatheter valves in biscuspid aortic valves (BAV). This study examines the reproducibility of SA and AA measurements and their potential impact on downstream transcatheter heart valve sizing and clinical outcomes.

      Methods

      44 consecutive patients (mean age: 73 ± 15 years, 57% male) undergoing CTA with subsequent SAPIEN 3 valve insertion for severe bicuspid aortic stenosis (AS) were included. AA was measured at the basal ring. SA was measured by generating a circle defined by the intercommisural distance. AA and SA were measured by 2 independent observers. Baseline characteristics, TAVR procedural data, and discharge echocardiography data were collected.

      Results

      The SA was significantly larger than the AA (562 ± 146mm2 vs. 518 ± 112mm2,p = 0.013). Interobserver agreement was high using both techniques (ICC AA = 0.98,p < 0.001; SA = 0.80,p < 0.001), but with narrower limits of agreement with AA measurements (mean difference (limits of agreement): AA = −3mm2 (22; 19), SA = −16mm2 (−92; 76)). AA-based device sizing demonstrated substantial agreement with final valve inserted (κ = 0.72,p < 0.001), while SA demonstrated fair agreement (κ = 0.40,p < 0.001). There was no difference in post TAVR gradients, paravalvular leakage or valve success between patients with concordant sizing between AA and SA, and those in whom SA would have suggested an alternate valve size.

      Conclusions

      Supra-annular sizing is less reproducible than annular sizing, with no difference in procedural complication rates in patients in whom supra-annular sizing would have altered the device size used. These results suggest no role for supra-annular sizing in current clinical practice.

      Keywords

      Abbreviations:

      AA (annular area), AS (aortic stenosis), BAV (bicuspid aortic valve), NYHA (New York Heart Association), SA (supra-annular area), TAVR (transcatheter aortic valve replacement), VARC (Valve Academic Research Consortium)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      Full access to the journal is a member benefit for SCCT Members, Login via the SCCT website to access all journal content.

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Popma J.J.
        • Deeb G.M.
        • Yakubov S.J.
        • et al.
        Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding valve in low-risk patients.
        N Engl J Med. 2019; 380: 1706-1715https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1816885
        • Mack M.J.
        • Leon M.B.
        • Thourani V.H.
        • et al.
        Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a balloon-expandable valve in low-risk patients.
        N Engl J Med. 2019; (NEJMoa1814052)https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1814052
        • Thyregod H.G.H.
        • Ihlemann N.
        • Jørgensen T.H.
        • et al.
        Five-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes from the nordic aortic valve intervention (NOTION) randomized clinical trial in lower surgical risk patients.
        Circulation. 2019; 118 (CIRCULATIONAHA)036606https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.036606
        • Mack M.J.
        • Brennan J.M.
        • Brindis R.
        • et al.
        Outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the United States.
        JAMA, J Am Med Assoc. 2013; 310: 2069-2077https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.282043
        • Watanabe Y.
        • Chevalier B.
        • Hayashida K.
        • et al.
        Comparison of multislice computed tomography findings between bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valves before and after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
        Cathet Cardiovasc Interv. 2015; 86: 323-330https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.25830
        • Philip F.
        • Faza N.N.
        • Schoenhagen P.
        • et al.
        Aortic annulus and root characteristics in severe aortic stenosis due to bicuspid aortic valve and tricuspid aortic valves: implications for transcatheter aortic valve therapies.
        Cathet Cardiovasc Interv. 2015; 86: E88-E98https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.25948
        • Mahadevia R.
        • Barker A.J.
        • Schnell S.
        • et al.
        Bicuspid aortic cusp fusion morphology alters aortic three-dimensional outflow patterns, wall shear stress, and expression of aortopathy.
        Circulation. 2014; 129: 673-682https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.003026
        • Mylotte D.
        • Lefevre T.
        • Søndergaard L.
        • et al.
        Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve disease.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64: 2330-2339https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2014.09.039
        • Bauer T.
        • Linke A.
        • Sievert H.
        • et al.
        Comparison of the effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with stenotic bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves (from the German TAVI Registry).
        Am J Cardiol. 2014; 113: 518-521https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2013.10.023
        • Xiong T.-Y.
        • Feng Y.
        • Li Y.-J.
        • et al.
        Supra-annular sizing for transcatheter aortic valve replacement candidates with bicuspid aortic valve.
        JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018; 11: 1789-1790https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2018.06.002
        • Xiong T.Y.
        • Li Y.J.
        • Feng Y.
        • et al.
        Understanding the interaction between transcatheter aortic valve prostheses and supra-annular structures from post-implant stent geometry.
        JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019; 12: 1164-1171https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2019.02.051
        • Liu X.
        • He Y.
        • Zhu Q.
        • et al.
        Supra-annular structure assessment for self-expanding transcatheter heart valve size selection in patients with bicuspid aortic valve.
        Cathet Cardiovasc Interv. 2018; 91: 986-994https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.27467
        • Blanke P.
        • Weir-McCall ., J.R.
        • Achenbach S.
        • et al.
        Computed tomography imaging in the context of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)/transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR): an expert consensus document of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography.
        J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2019; 13: 1-20https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2018.11.008
        • Sievers H.H.
        • Schmidtke C.
        A classification system for the bicuspid aortic valve from 304 surgical specimens.
        J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007; 133: 1226-1233https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.01.039
        • Sun C.
        • Si K.
        • Zheng Y.
        • et al.
        Phenotypes of aortic valve disease according to detailed anatomical classification of patients who underwent aortic valve replacement surgery.
        Cardiovasc Pathol. 2019; 41: 1-7https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carpath.2019.01.004
        • Kim W.-K.
        • Renker M.
        • Rolf A.
        • et al.
        Annular versus supra-annular sizing for TAVI in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis.
        EuroIntervention. 2019; 15: e231-e238https://doi.org/10.4244/eij-d-19-00236
      1. Valve TH. Edwards SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Heart Valve with the Edwards Certitude Delivery System igure 1. Edwards SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Heart Valve Instructions for Use n.(d).

        • Zoghbi W.A.
        • Chambers J.B.
        • Dumesnil J.G.
        • et al.
        Recommendations for evaluation of prosthetic valves with echocardiography and Doppler ultrasound. A report from the American society of echocardiography's guidelines and standards committee and the task force on prosthetic valves, developed in conjunction.
        J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2009; 22: 975-1014https://doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2009.07.013
        • Kappetein A.P.
        • Head S.J.
        • Généreux P.
        • et al.
        Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 60: 1438-1454https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.09.001
        • Yoon S.-H.
        • Lefèvre T.
        • Ahn J.-M.
        • et al.
        Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with early- and new-generation devices in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016; 68: 1195-1205https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.06.041
        • Jilaihawi H.
        • Chen M.
        • Webb J.
        • et al.
        A bicuspid aortic valve imaging classification for the TAVR era.
        JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016; 9: 1145-1158https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2015.12.022
        • Binder R.K.
        • Webb J.G.
        • Willson A.B.
        • et al.
        The impact of integration of a multidetector computed tomography annulus area sizing algorithm on outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a prospective, multicenter, controlled trial.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013; 62: 431-438https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.04.036
        • Hayashida K.
        • Bouvier E.
        • Lefèvre T.
        • et al.
        Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for patients with severe bicuspid aortic valve stenosis.
        Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013; 6: 284-291https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.112.000084
        • Amoretti F.
        • Cerillo A.G.
        • Mariani M.
        • Stefano P.
        A simple method to visualize the bicuspid aortic valve pathology by cardiac computed tomography.
        J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2019; : 1-4https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2019.08.005
        • Tchetche D.
        • de Biase C.
        • van Gils L.
        • et al.
        Bicuspid aortic valve anatomy and relationship with devices: the BAVARD multicenter registry.
        Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2019; 12e007107https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.118.007107
        • Barbanti M.
        • Yang T.H.
        • Rodès Cabau J.
        • et al.
        Anatomical and procedural features associated with aortic root rupture during balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement.
        Circulation. 2013; 128: 244-253https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.002947
        • Knobloch G.
        • Sweetman S.
        • Bartels C.
        • et al.
        Inter- and intra-observer repeatability of aortic annulus measurements on screening CT for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR): implications for appropriate device sizing.
        Eur J Radiol. 2018; 105: 209-215https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.06.003
        • Schuhbaeck A.
        • Achenbach S.
        • Pflederer T.
        • et al.
        Reproducibility of aortic annulus measurements by computed tomography.
        Eur Radiol. 2014; 24: 1878-1888https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3199-5
        • Gurvitch R.
        • Webb J.G.
        • Yuan R.
        • et al.
        Aortic annulus diameter determination by multidetector computed tomography: reproducibility, applicability, and implications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
        JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011; 4: 1235-1245https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2011.07.014
        • Blanke P.
        • Weir-McCall ., J.R.
        • Achenbach S.
        • et al.
        Computed tomography imaging in the context of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)/Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR): an expert consensus document of the society of cardiovascular computed tomography.
        JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019; 12: 1-24https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.12.003
        • Wang Y.
        • Wang M.
        • Song G.
        • et al.
        Optimal pre-TAVR annulus sizing in patients with bicuspid aortic valve: area-derived perimeter by CT is the best-correlated measure with intraoperative sizing.
        Eur Radiol. 2019; 29: 259-269https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5592-y
        • Jeger R.
        • Reuthebuch O.
        • Fahrni G.
        • Laborde J.C.
        • Vogel R.
        • Kaiser C.
        Supra-annular sizing for transcatheter valve implantation in bicuspid aortic stenosis.
        Postep w Kardiol Interwencyjnej. 2018; 14: 187-190https://doi.org/10.5114/aic.2018.76411
        • Yoon S.-H.
        • Bleiziffer S.
        • De Backer O.
        • et al.
        Outcomes in transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valve stenosis.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 69: 2579-2589https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.03.017
        • Makkar R.R.
        • Yoon S.-H.
        • Leon M.B.
        • et al.
        Association between transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis and mortality or stroke.
        Jama. 2019; 321: 2193https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.7108
        • Perlman G.Y.
        • Blanke P.
        • Dvir D.
        • et al.
        Bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: favorable early outcomes with a next-generation transcatheter heart valve in a multicenter study.
        JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016; 9: 817-824https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2016.01.002