Search

Background: Operator characteristics and outcome relationships have not been evaluated at the individual operator level., Methods: From New York State Department of Health Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System, 5896 elective transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures performed by 161 operators between 2012 and 2016 were analyzed. We examined the following characteristics of the primary operator: specialty (surgery vs cardiology), sex, medical school location, experience of cardiology practice, interventional cardiology credentialing, past-year TAVR volume, and first year performing TAVR in New York State. The primary outcome was a composite of inhospital mortality, stroke, and acute myocardial infarction., Results: After adjusting for patient and other provider characteristics, there was no significant difference in the risk of major events between surgeons and cardiologists in performing TAVR (3.4% vs 3.6%, P = .60), between male operators and female operators (P = .80), and between operators who graduated from a US medical school and operators educated outside the United States (3.4% vs 3.6%, P = .73). In the subgroup analysis, interventional cardiology credentialing was not significantly associated with the inhospital major events (odds ratio 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.56 to 1.88; P = .80)., Conclusions: Primary operator specialty and other characteristics for TAVR were not associated with a difference in risk-adjusted inhospital outcomes. That may be due to the heart team model that allows proceduralists of different backgrounds to lend their expertise to the procedure., (Copyright © 2021 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is the standard of care for many patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and relies on accurate sizing of the aortic annulus. It has been suggested that 3-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (3D TEE) may be used instead of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) for TAVR planning. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared 3D TEE and MDCT for pre-TAVR measurements. Methods and Results A systematic literature search was performed. The primary outcome was the correlation coefficient between 3D TEE- and MDCT-measured annular area. Secondary outcomes were correlation coefficients for mean annular diameter, annular perimeter, and left ventricular outflow tract area; interobserver and intraobserver agreements; mean differences between 3D TEE and MDCT measurements; and pooled sensitivities, specificities, and receiver operating characteristic area under curve values of 3D TEE and MDCT for discriminating post-TAVR paravalvular aortic regurgitation. A random effects model was used. Meta-regression and leave-one-out analysis for the primary outcome were performed. Nineteen studies with a total of 1599 patients were included. Correlations between 3D TEE and MDCT annular area, annular perimeter, annular diameter, and left ventricular outflow tract area measurements were strong (0.86 [95% CI, 0.80-0.90]; 0.89 [CI, 0.82-0.93]; 0.80 [CI, 0.70-0.87]; and 0.78 [CI, 0.61-0.88], respectively). Mean differences between 3D TEE and MDCT between measurements were small and nonsignificant. Interobserver and intraobserver agreement and discriminatory abilities for paravalvular aortic regurgitation were good for both 3D TEE and MDCT. Conclusions For pre-TAVR planning, 3D TEE is comparable to MDCT. In patients with renal dysfunction, 3D TEE may be potentially advantageous for TAVR measurements because of the lack of contrast exposure.

Aortic valve area (AVA) is commonly determined from 2-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography (2D TTE) by the continuity equation; however, this method relies on geometric assumptions of the left ventricular outflow tract which may not hold true. This study compared mean differences and correlations for AVA by planimetric (2-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography [2D TEE], 3-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography [3D TEE], 3-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography [3D TTE], multi-detector computed tomography [MDCT], and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) with hemodynamic methods (2D TTE and catheterization) using pairwise meta-analysis. Ovid MEDLINE®, Ovid EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library (Wiley) were queried for studies comparing AVA measurements assessed by planimetric and hemodynamic techniques. Pairwise meta-analysis for mean differences (using random effect model) and for correlation coefficients (r) were performed. Forty-five studies (3014 patients) were included. Mean differences between planimetric and hemodynamic techniques were 0.12 cm2 (95%CI 0.10–0.15) for AVA (pooled r = 0.84; 95%CI 0.76–0.90); 1.36cm2 (95%CI 1.03–1.69) for left ventricular outflow tract area; and 0.13 cm (95%CI 0.07–0.20) for annular diameter (pooled r = 0.76; 95% CI 0.64–0.94); 0.67 cm2 (95%CI 0.59–0.76) for annular area (pooled r = 0.74; 95%CI 0.55–0.86). Planimetric techniques slightly, but significantly, overestimate AVA when compared to hemodynamic techniques. • Continuity equation is commonly used to determine aortic valve area (AVA) from echo. • Planimetric techniques overestimate AVA when compared to hemodynamic techniques. • The impact of planimetric AVA grading use on clinical outcomes should be validated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]