Real-time 3D imaging in the cardiac catheterization laboratory

C-THV measures of self-expandable valve positioning and correlation with implant outcomes

BACKGROUND

Accurate positioning of the valve device during transcutaneous aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is of crucial importance. The Paieon C-THV navigation system has been designed to correctly guide device deployment during TAVI.

OBJECTIVES

Using this navigation system we aimed to determine the correlation between the anatomic measures of the native aortic valve and the deployed self-expandable valve positioning and to explore the impact upon procedural outcomes.

METHODS

We analyzed data of 68 patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI, using the catheter-based Medtronic-CoreValve self-expandable system. Patients were subdivided into two groups according to whether the C-THV system was used (50) or not (18) during the implantation process. Analysis of geometrical outcomes vs. clinical outcomes including postprocedural electrical conduction defect and/or para-valvular leaks was performed.

RESULTS

Taking the target implantation line as a reference; relatively lower vs. higher implantations correlated with a higher frequency of any new onset electrical conduction defect (ECD). The mean corresponding distance from valve inferior edge below the virtual aortic annulus line was 3.0 ± 1.6 mm vs. 1.2 ± 1.3 mm in patients with (38.5%) vs. without any new onset ECD, respectively (P = 0.05). The use of C-THV navigation seemed to correlate with higher valve implants but it had no impact on the occurrence of postprocedural paravalvular leaks.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-expandable valve implants guided by C-THV navigation seems to be associated with more precise implants and lower risk for postprocedural electrical conduction defects, due to higher location in relation to the target line.

Multicenter evaluation of Edwards SAPIEN positioning during transcatheter aortic valve implantation with correlates for device movement during final deployment

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate the exact location of Edwards SAPIEN (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) devices in different stages of implantation and to quantify possible operator-independent device movement during final deployment.

BACKGROUND

Accurate device positioning during transcatheter aortic valve implantation is crucial in order to achieve optimal results.

METHODS

This multicenter study consisted of 68 procedures with reliable pacemaker capture. Device positions were assessed using fluoroscopic images and the C-THV system (Paieon Medical, Rosh Ha'Ayin, Israel).

RESULTS

The location after implantation was significantly higher than in the final stage of rapid pacing: 16.7 ± 16.3% of device height below the plane of the lower sinus border versus 32.6 ± 13.8%, p < 0.0001. Operator-independent device-center upper movement during final deployment was 2 ± 1.43 mm, range: -1.3 to 4.6 mm. Device movement was asymmetrical, occurring more in the lower part of the device than in its upper part (3.2 ± 1.4 mm vs. 0.75 ± 1.5 mm, p < 0.001), resulting in device shortening. Multivariate analysis revealed that moderate and severe aortic valve calcification had 49% higher upward movement than mild calcification (p = 0.03), and aortic sinus volume was negatively correlated with movement size (r = -0.35, p = 0.005). This movement was independent of device version (SAPIEN vs. SAPIEN XT), procedural access (transfemoral vs. transapical), and interventricular septum width.

CONCLUSIONS

The final Edwards SAPIEN position is mostly aortic in relation to the lower sinus border. There is an operator-independent upward movement of the device center during the final stage of implantation. Anticipated upward movement of the device should influence its positioning before final deployment.

A practical guide to multimodality imaging of transcatheter aortic valve replacement

The advent of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is one of the most widely anticipated advances in the care of patients with severe aortic stenosis. This procedure is unique in many ways, one of which is the need for a multimodality imaging team-based approach throughout the continuum of the care of TAVR patients. Pre-procedural planning, intra-procedural implantation optimization, and long-term follow-up of patients undergoing TAVR require the expert use of various imaging modalities, each of which has its own strengths and limitations. Divided into 3 sections (pre-procedural, intraprocedural, and long-term follow-up), this review offers a single source for expert opinion and evidence-based guidance on how to incorporate the various modalities at each step in the care of a TAVR patient. Although much has been learned in the short span of time since TAVR was introduced, recommendations are offered for clinically relevant research that will lead to refinement of best practice strategies for incorporating multimodality imaging into TAVR patient care.