Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32396570›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Retrospectively ECG-gated helical vs. non-ECG-synchronized high-pitch CTA of the aortic root for TAVI planning.

Barbora Horehledova, Casper Mihl, Ellen Boswijk, Genevieve A J C Crombag, Estelle C Nijssen, Patty J Nelemans, Leo F Veenstra, Joachim E Wildberger, Marco Das

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Barbora HorehledovaDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9606-9584
Casper MihlDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Ellen BoswijkDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Genevieve A J C CrombagDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Estelle C NijssenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Patty J NelemansDepartment of Epidemiology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Leo F VeenstraDepartment of Cardiology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Joachim E WildbergerDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Marco DasDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMultidetector computed tomography (MDCT) plays a key role in patient assessment prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, to date no consensus has been established on what is the optimal pre-procedural imaging protocol. Variability in pre-TAVI acquisition protocols may lead to discrepancies in aortic annulus measurements and may potentially influence prosthesis size selection. PURPOSE: The current study evaluates the magnitude of differences in aortic annulus measurements using max-systolic, end-diastolic, and non-ECG-synchronized imaging, as well as the impact of method on prosthesis size selection. MATERIAL AND

methodsFifty consecutive TAVI-candidates, who underwent retrospectively-ECG-gated CT angiography (CTA) of the aortic root, directly followed by non-ECG-synchronized high-pitch CT of the entire aorta, were retrospectively included. Aortic root dimensions were assessed at each 10% increment of the R-R interval (0-100%) and on the non-ECG-synchronized scan. Dimensional changes within the cardiac cycle were evaluated using a 1-way repeated ANOVA. Agreement in measurements between max-systole, end-diastole and non-ECG-synchronized scans was assessed with Bland-Altman analysis.

resultsMaximal dimensions of the aortic root structures and minimum annulus-coronary ostia distances were measured during systole. Max-systolic measurements were significantly and substantially larger than end-diastolic (p<0.001) and non-ECG-synchronized measurements (p<0.001). Due to these discrepancies, the three methods resulted in the same prosthesis size selection in only 48-62% of patients.

conclusionsThe systematic differences between max-systolic, end-diastolic and non-ECG-synchronized measurements for relevant aortic annular dimensions are both statistically significant and clinically relevant. Imaging strategy impacts prosthesis size selection in nearly half the TAVI-candidates. End-diastolic and non-ECG-synchronized imaging does not provide optimal information for prosthesis size selection. Systolic image acquisition is necessary for assessment of maximal annular dimensions and minimum annulus-coronary ostia distances.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAortaComputed Tomography AngiographyFemaleHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesTranscatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Identifiers

PMID32396570
PMCPMC7217477
OpenAlexW3025521065

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.