TY - JOUR
T1 - Multimodality approach for endovascular left atrial appendage closure
T2 - Head-to-head comparison among 2D and 3D echocardiography, angiography, and computer tomography
AU - Italiano, Gianpiero
AU - Maltagliati, Anna
AU - Mantegazza, Valentina
AU - Fusini, Laura
AU - Mancini, Maria Elisabetta
AU - Gasperetti, Alessio
AU - Brusoni, Denise
AU - Susini, Francesca
AU - Formenti, Alberto
AU - Pontone, Gianluca
AU - Fassini, Gaetano
AU - Tondo, Claudio
AU - Pepi, Mauro
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2020/12
Y1 - 2020/12
N2 - Background: Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) requires accurate pre-and intraprocedural measurements, and multimodality imaging is an essential tool for guiding the procedure. Two-dimensional (2D TOE) and three-dimensional (3D TOE) transoesophageal echocardiography, cardiac computed tomography (CCT), and conventional cardiac angiography (CCA) are commonly used to evaluate left atrial appendage (LAA) size. However, standardized approaches in measurement methods by different imaging modalities are lacking. The aims of the study were to evaluate the LAA dimension and morphology in patients undergoing LAAC and to compare data obtained by different imaging modalities: 2D and 3D TOE, CCT, and CCA. Methods: A total of 200 patients (mean age 70 ± 8 years, 128 males) were examined by different imaging techniques (161 2D TOE, 103 3D TOE, 98 CCT, and 200 CCA). Patients underwent preoperative CCT and intraoperative 2D and 3D TOE and CCA. Results: A significant correlation was found among all measurements obtained by different modalities. In particular, 3D TOE and CCT measurements were highly correlated with an excellent agreement for the landing zone (LZ) dimensions (LZ diameter: r = 0.87; LAA depth: r = 0.91, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Head-to-head comparison among imaging techniques (2D and 3D TOE, CCT, and CCA) showed a good correlation among LZ diameter measurements obtained by different imaging modalities, which is a parameter of paramount importance for the choice of the LAAC device size. LZ diameters and area by 3D TOE had the best correlation with CCT.
AB - Background: Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) requires accurate pre-and intraprocedural measurements, and multimodality imaging is an essential tool for guiding the procedure. Two-dimensional (2D TOE) and three-dimensional (3D TOE) transoesophageal echocardiography, cardiac computed tomography (CCT), and conventional cardiac angiography (CCA) are commonly used to evaluate left atrial appendage (LAA) size. However, standardized approaches in measurement methods by different imaging modalities are lacking. The aims of the study were to evaluate the LAA dimension and morphology in patients undergoing LAAC and to compare data obtained by different imaging modalities: 2D and 3D TOE, CCT, and CCA. Methods: A total of 200 patients (mean age 70 ± 8 years, 128 males) were examined by different imaging techniques (161 2D TOE, 103 3D TOE, 98 CCT, and 200 CCA). Patients underwent preoperative CCT and intraoperative 2D and 3D TOE and CCA. Results: A significant correlation was found among all measurements obtained by different modalities. In particular, 3D TOE and CCT measurements were highly correlated with an excellent agreement for the landing zone (LZ) dimensions (LZ diameter: r = 0.87; LAA depth: r = 0.91, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Head-to-head comparison among imaging techniques (2D and 3D TOE, CCT, and CCA) showed a good correlation among LZ diameter measurements obtained by different imaging modalities, which is a parameter of paramount importance for the choice of the LAAC device size. LZ diameters and area by 3D TOE had the best correlation with CCT.
KW - 3D transoesophageal echocardiography
KW - Atrial fibrillation
KW - Computed tomography
KW - Left atrial appendage closure
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85109092276&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85109092276&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/diagnostics10121103
DO - 10.3390/diagnostics10121103
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85109092276
SN - 2075-4418
VL - 10
JO - Diagnostics
JF - Diagnostics
IS - 12
M1 - 1103
ER -