Bertsche D, Metze P, Luo E, Dahme T, Gonska B, Rottbauer W, Vernikouskaya I, Rasche V, Schneider LM. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for preprocedural planning of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure.
Front Cardiovasc Med 2023;
10:1132626. [PMID:
37424915 PMCID:
PMC10326314 DOI:
10.3389/fcvm.2023.1132626]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2022] [Accepted: 06/01/2023] [Indexed: 07/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction
Percutaneous closure of the left atrial appendage (LAA) facilitates stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. Optimal device selection and positioning are often challenging due to highly variable LAA shape and dimension and thus require accurate assessment of the respective anatomy. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and x-ray fluoroscopy (XR) represent the gold standard imaging techniques. However, device underestimation has frequently been observed. Assessment based on 3-dimensional computer tomography (CTA) has been reported as more accurate but increases radiation and contrast agent burden. In this study, the use of non-contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) to support preprocedural planning for LAA closure (LAAc) was investigated.
Methods
CMR was performed in thirteen patients prior to LAAc. Based on the 3-dimensional CMR image data, the dimensions of the LAA were quantified and optimal C-arm angulations were determined and compared to periprocedural data. Quantitative figures used for evaluation of the technique comprised the maximum diameter, the diameter derived from perimeter and the area of the landing zone of the LAA.
Results
Perimeter- and area-based diameters derived from preprocedural CMR showed excellent congruency compared to those measured periprocedurally by XR, whereas the respective maximum diameter resulted in significant overestimation (p < 0.05). Compared to TEE assessment, CMR-derived diameters resulted in significantly larger dimensions (p < 0.05). The deviation of the maximum diameter to the diameters measured by XR and TEE correlated well with the ovality of the LAA. C-arm angulations used during the procedures were in agreement with those determined by CMR in case of circular LAA.
Discussion
This small pilot study demonstrates the potential of non-contrast-enhanced CMR to support preprocedural planning of LAAc. Diameter measurements based on LAA area and perimeter correlated well with the actual device selection parameters. CMR-derived determination of landing zones facilitated accurate C-arm angulation for optimal device positioning.
Collapse