Assessment of consistency in aortic valve sizing between surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Introduction: One of the crucial aspects of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is the valve prosthesis selection. Aim: To assess the consistency of the aortic valve sizing in SAVR and TAVR by comparing the sizes of aortic prostheses selected based on the intraprocedural annulus measurements and simulation of the TAVR planning. Material and methods: The study comprised of 167 patients with aortic stenosis treated with SAVR. Simulation of the prosthesis sizing blinded to the SAVR results was performed based on the assessment of cardiac computed tomography (CCT) images. Results: Based on the CCT images, the average value of the aortic annulus diameter was 25.4 ±3.0 mm. Aortic valve calcifications were mild in 29 cases, moderate in 78 cases, and severe in 53 cases. The sizes of the valves recommended by the simulations were larger than valves surgically implanted in 98.6% of patients for self-expanding and in 91.7% of patients for balloon-expandable prostheses. The average difference for self-expanding prostheses was 6.4 mm and 4.5 mm for balloon expandable valves. Additionally, a negative correlation was observed for the difference in prosthesis size and size of the valve used by surgeons. Conclusions: There is a systematic difference between sizes of aortic prostheses used in SAVR and TAVR. Further studies are needed to evaluate if the difference in prosthesis size selection contributes to the frequency of prosthesis-patient mismatch phenomenon and burden of high postoperative mean transaortic gradient.

Coronary computed tomography angiography for the assessment of SYNTAX score.

BACKGROUND: Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is applied in a growing number of clinical indications. This imaging modality is often regarded as a surrogate of invasive coronary angiography (ICA). In this paper we evaluate the applicability of CCTA alone in the assessment of the SYNTAX score. AIM: To evaluate the feasibility of calculating the SYNTAX score (SXScore) using CCTA alone instead of ICA. METHODS: Ninety consecutive patients with multivessel or left main (LM) coronary artery disease diagnosed with ICA, in whom prior CCTA scan was available, were included in a post-hoc analysis. First, the SXScore was calculated twice in ten-week intervals by two experienced observers using ICA for each patient. Then the SXScore was calculated twice using CCTA following the same regimen for each patient. Weighted kappa statistic was used to assess the intra-modality and inter-modality reproducibility of the SXScore. RESULTS: Ninety patients, aged 63.8 ± 8.9 years, 60% male, 64.4% with two-vessel disease, and 35.6% with three-vessel or LM disease met the inclusion criteria. 287 lesions were identified by ICA and 280 by CCTA (p = 0.56). Median total SXScore was 11.5 (10.2­14.0) as calculated by ICA and 16.0 (14.3­19.4) by CCTA (p < 0.001), and the results were moderately correlated (R = 0.38). Inter-modality agreement between ICA and CCTA for SXScore tertiles was moderate (kappa = 0.40). The intra-modality reproducibility of ICA and CCTA for SXScore tertiles was 0.47 and 0.51, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Inter-modality agreement between CCTA and ICA for calculation of SXSscore is moderate but only slightly worse than intra-modality reproducibility for angiographic alone evaluation. Most of the observed variability can be assigned to the characteristic of the SXScore itself, not to the choice of imaging method. However, the application of CCTA for the assessment of SXScore should be used cautiously.