Why the study?
Emerging transcatheter approaches for tricuspid valve disease require better anatomical and pathological appreciation for pre-procedural planning given the valve's complex and variable anatomy.
Does three-dimensional echocardiography improve the assessment of tricuspid valve anatomy and pathology compared to two-dimensional echocardiography for pre-procedural planning?
Does three-dimensional echocardiography improve the assessment of tricuspid valve anatomy and pathology compared to two-dimensional echocardiography for pre-procedural planning?
Three-dimensional echocardiography is a valuable supplemental imaging modality for detailed anatomical and pathological assessment of the tricuspid valve, particularly for planning transcatheter interventions.
May support supplemental 3D echo use in tricuspid pre-procedural planning; leaves open comparative outcome data versus 2D.
Due to the proportionally high mortality rates associated with isolated tricuspid valve surgery, the invasive treatment of such pathology, historically, has been left largely unaddressed. Recently, there has been an appreciation for the mortality and morbidity of tricuspid valve disease, giving rise to the movement towards identifying less invasive, transcatheter approaches for treatment. Due to the technical complexity of these procedures along with the uniqueness and variability of tricuspid valve anatomy, a better appreciation of the tricuspid valve anatomy and pathology is required for pre-procedural planning. While two-dimensional echocardiography serves as the initial non-invasive modality for tricuspid valve evaluation, three-dimensional echocardiography provides a complete en face view of the tricuspid valve and surrounding structures, as well contributes further information regarding disease etiology and severity. In this review, we discuss the utility of three-dimensional echocardiography as a supplement to two-dimensional imaging to better assess tricuspid valve disease and anatomy to aide in future innovative therapies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jost et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: