Why the study?
Optimal device selection and positioning for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure require accurate anatomical assessment, but standard imaging frequently underestimates device size while CTA increases radiation and contrast burden.
Does non-contrast-enhanced CMR provide accurate preprocedural planning measurements for LAA closure compared to TEE and XR in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Does non-contrast-enhanced CMR provide accurate preprocedural planning measurements for LAA closure compared to TEE and XR in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Non-contrast-enhanced CMR is a feasible and accurate imaging modality for preprocedural planning and device selection in left atrial appendage closure.
3D-printed LAA models may refine device sizing beyond TEE; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
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: < 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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bertsche et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: