Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review
May inform modality selection in structural interventions; leaves open need for comparative trials before standardization.
Percutaneous techniques to treat structural heart disease are rapidly evolving based on innovative interventions and the considerable advancement in image guidance technology. While two-dimensional transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography have been integral to procedural planning and execution, intracardiac and three-dimensional echocardiography supply unique visualization of target structures with a potential improvement in patient safety and procedural efficacy. The choice of image guidance modality is based on specific differences between imaging systems, as well as other variables including cost, patient safety, operator expertise, and complexity of procedure. We will compare the adjunctive imaging tools for structural heart disease interventions, with a focus on intracardiac echocardiography and real-time three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hudson et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: