TY - JOUR
T1 - Double S-Curve Versus Cusp-Overlap Technique
T2 - Defining the Optimal Fluoroscopic Projection for TAVR With a Self-Expanding Device
AU - Ben-Shoshan, Jeremy
AU - Alosaimi, Hind
AU - Lauzier, Pascal Thériault
AU - Pighi, Michele
AU - Talmor-Barkan, Yeela
AU - Overtchouk, Pavel
AU - Martucci, Giuseppe
AU - Spaziano, Marco
AU - Finkelstein, Ariel
AU - Gada, Hemal
AU - Piazza, Nicolo
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021
PY - 2021/1/25
Y1 - 2021/1/25
N2 - Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the concordance between transcatheter aortic valve implantation angles generated by the “double S-curve” and “cusp-overlap” techniques. Background: The “double S-curve” and “cusp-overlap” methods aim to define optimal fluoroscopic projections for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a self-expandable device. Methods: The study included 100 consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with self-expanding device planned by multidetector computed tomography. TAVR was performed using the double S-curve model, as a view in which both the aortic valve annulus and delivery catheter planes are displayed perpendicularly on fluoroscopy. Optimal projection according to the cusp-overlap technique was retrospectively generated by overlapping the right and left cups on the multidetector computed tomography annular plane. The angular difference between methods was assessed in spherical 3 dimensions and on the left and right anterior oblique (RAO) and cranial and caudal (CAU) axes. Results: The double S-curve and cusp-overlap methods provided views located in the same quadrant, mostly the RAO and CAU, in 92% of patients with a median 3-dimensional angular difference of 10.0° (interquartile range: 5.5° to 17.9°). The 3-dimensional deviation between the average angulation obtained by each method was not statistically significant (1.49°; p = 0.349). No significant differences in average coordinates were noted between the double S-curve and cusp-overlap methods (RAO: 14.7 ± 15.2 vs. 12.9 ± 12.5; p = 0.36; and CAU: 27.0 ± 9.4 vs. 26.9 ± 10.4; p = 0.90). TAVR using the double S-curve was associated with 98% device success, low complication rate, and absence of moderate-to-severe paravalvular leak. Conclusions: The double S-curve and cusp-overlap methods provide comparable TAVR projections, mostly RAO and CAU. TAVR using the double S-curve model is associated with a high rate of device success and low rate of procedural complications.
AB - Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the concordance between transcatheter aortic valve implantation angles generated by the “double S-curve” and “cusp-overlap” techniques. Background: The “double S-curve” and “cusp-overlap” methods aim to define optimal fluoroscopic projections for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a self-expandable device. Methods: The study included 100 consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with self-expanding device planned by multidetector computed tomography. TAVR was performed using the double S-curve model, as a view in which both the aortic valve annulus and delivery catheter planes are displayed perpendicularly on fluoroscopy. Optimal projection according to the cusp-overlap technique was retrospectively generated by overlapping the right and left cups on the multidetector computed tomography annular plane. The angular difference between methods was assessed in spherical 3 dimensions and on the left and right anterior oblique (RAO) and cranial and caudal (CAU) axes. Results: The double S-curve and cusp-overlap methods provided views located in the same quadrant, mostly the RAO and CAU, in 92% of patients with a median 3-dimensional angular difference of 10.0° (interquartile range: 5.5° to 17.9°). The 3-dimensional deviation between the average angulation obtained by each method was not statistically significant (1.49°; p = 0.349). No significant differences in average coordinates were noted between the double S-curve and cusp-overlap methods (RAO: 14.7 ± 15.2 vs. 12.9 ± 12.5; p = 0.36; and CAU: 27.0 ± 9.4 vs. 26.9 ± 10.4; p = 0.90). TAVR using the double S-curve was associated with 98% device success, low complication rate, and absence of moderate-to-severe paravalvular leak. Conclusions: The double S-curve and cusp-overlap methods provide comparable TAVR projections, mostly RAO and CAU. TAVR using the double S-curve model is associated with a high rate of device success and low rate of procedural complications.
KW - cusp-overlap technique
KW - double-S curve methods
KW - optimal fluoroscopic projection
KW - transcatheter aortic valve replacement
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85098976346&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.10.033
DO - 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.10.033
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
C2 - 33478635
AN - SCOPUS:85098976346
SN - 1936-8798
VL - 14
SP - 185
EP - 194
JO - JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
JF - JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
IS - 2
ER -