首页> 外文期刊>European Heart Journal: The Journal of the European Society of Cardiology >Three dimensional evaluation of the aortic annulus using multislice computer tomography: are manufacturer's guidelines for sizing for percutaneous aortic valve replacement helpful?
【24h】

Three dimensional evaluation of the aortic annulus using multislice computer tomography: are manufacturer's guidelines for sizing for percutaneous aortic valve replacement helpful?

机译:使用多层计算机断层扫描技术对主动脉瓣环进行三维评估:制造商的经皮主动脉瓣置换术尺寸指南是否有帮助?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

AIMS: To evaluate the effects of applying current sizing guidelines to different multislice computer tomography (MSCT) aortic annulus measurements on Corevalve (CRS) size selection. METHODS AND RESULTS: Multislice computer tomography annulus diameters [minimum: D(min); maximum: D(max); mean: D(mean) = (D(min) + D(max))/2; mean from circumference: D(circ); mean from surface area: D(CSA)] were measured in 75 patients referred for percutaneous valve replacement. Fifty patients subsequently received a CRS (26 mm: n = 22; 29 mm: n = 28). D(min) and D(max) differed substantially [mean difference (95% CI) = 6.5 mm (5.7-7.2), P < 0.001]. If D(min) were used for sizing 26% of 75 patients would be ineligible (annulus too small in 23%, too large in 3%), 48% would receive a 26 mm and 12% a 29 mm CRS. If D(max) were used, 39% would be ineligible (all annuli too large), 4% would receive a 26 mm, and 52% a 29 mm CRS. Using D(mean), D(circ), or D(CSA) most patients would receive a 29 mm CRS and 11, 16, and 9% would be ineligible. In 50 patients who received a CRS operator choice corresponded best with sizing based on D(CSA) and D(mean) (76%, 74%), but undersizing occurred in 20 and 22% of which half were ineligible (annulus too large). CONCLUSION: Eligibility varied substantially depending on the sizing criterion. In clinical practice both under- and oversizing were common. Industry guidelines should recognize the oval shape of the aortic annulus.
机译:目的:评估对不同的多层计算机断层摄影(MSCT)主动脉瓣环测量应用当前的大小调整准则对Corevalve(CRS)大小选择的影响。方法和结果:多层计算机断层扫描环空直径[最小值:D(min);最大:D(最大);平均值:D(平均值)=(D(最小)+ D(最大))/ 2;圆周均值:D(circ);从表面积平均值:D(CSA)]中测量了75例经皮瓣膜置换术的患者。随后有50名患者接受了CRS(26毫米:n = 22; 29毫米:n = 28)。 D(min)和D(max)显着不同[平均差异(95%CI)= 6.5 mm(5.7-7.2),P <0.001]。如果使用D(min)来确定大小,则75名患者中有26%是不合格的(环过小23%,过大3%),48%的患者将接受26 mm的CRS,而12%的患者将接受29 mm的CRS。如果使用D(max),则39%不合格(所有环面过大),4%将接受26毫米,而52%将接受29毫米CRS。使用D(平均),D(圆形)或D(CSA),大多数患者将接受29 mm CRS,而11、16和9%的患者将不合格。在接受CRS操作员选择的50例患者中,基于D(CSA)和D(平均值)的大小调整最为合适(76%,74%),但发生过小调整的比例为20%和22%,其中一半不合格(环面过大) 。结论:资格的大小取决于大小标准。在临床实践中,尺寸偏小和尺寸偏大都是常见的。行业指南应认识到主动脉瓣环的椭圆形。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号