RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated that three-dimensional (3D) transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is an alternative to multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) for aortic valve sizing in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, conventional cross-sectional analysis of aortic annulus by 3D TEE has some limitations such as lengthy analytical time. A novel software for automated valve measurement has been developed for 3D TEE. We evaluated the accuracy and analytical time of aortic annular measurements using this novel automated software in the clinical setting. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 43 patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) who underwent TAVR. All patients underwent intraoperative TEE and MDCT. We measured aortic annular area by automated, semi-automated, and cross-sectional methods using 3D TEE datasets. These measurements were compared to the corresponding MDCT reference values. We also compared the analytical time of the three methods. RESULTS: Automated and semi-automated analyses required significantly shorter analytical time compared to cross-sectional analysis (automated: 30.1±5.79s, semi-automated: 74.1±15.0s, manual: 81.8±18.5s, p<0.05). Compared to MDCT measurement (393.7±81.0mm2), annular areas measured by automated and cross-sectional methods were significantly smaller (automated: 380.6±77.1mm2, cross-sectional: 374.7±76.8mm2, p<0.05), while that obtained by semi-automated method was not significantly different (387.7±75.8mm2). Annular areas determined by semi-automated and cross-sectional analyses had narrower limits of agreement (LOA) with MDCT measurements, compared to automated analysis (automated: -68.6 to 94.7mm2, semi-automated: -48.3 to 60.2mm2, cross-sectional: -40.0 to 77.9mm2). Measurements by all three methods using 3D TEE showed high correlation with MDCT measurement (automated: r=0.86, semi-automated: r=0.94, cross-sectional: r=0.93). CONCLUSIONS: For aortic annular measurements using 3D TEE in AS patients, semi-automated analysis using the novel automated software reduced analytical time while maintaining similar accuracy compared to the conventional cross-sectional analysis. This automated software may have acceptable feasibility in the clinical setting.