Key result
Intra-cardiac echocardiography was superior to trans-thoracic echocardiography for viewing mitral valve anatomy (score 1.88 vs 1.60, p=0.02) but failed to adequately visualize myocardial contrast to guide alcohol septal ablation.
Why the study?
Does intra-cardiac echocardiography improve anatomical and contrast visualization compared to trans-thoracic echocardiography in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy undergoing alcohol septal ablation?
Observational (n=20)
No
Does intra-cardiac echocardiography improve anatomical and contrast visualization compared to trans-thoracic echocardiography in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy undergoing alcohol septal ablation?
Absolute Event Rate: 1.88% vs 1.6%
p-value: p=0.02
Intra-cardiac echocardiography cannot reliably visualize myocardial contrast due to acoustic shadowing and inadequate opacification, making it unsuitable to replace trans-thoracic echocardiography for guiding alcohol septal ablation.
ICE should not replace TTE for guiding alcohol septal ablation; leaves open its role in mitral valve assessment.
Alcohol septal ablation (ASA) in hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy reduces left ventricular outflow tract gradients. A third of patients do not respond; inaccurate localisation of the iatrogenic infarct can be responsible. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) using myocardial contrast can be difficult in the laboratory environment. Intra-cardiac echocardiography (ICE) provides high-quality images. We aimed to assess ICE against TTE in ASA. The ability of ICE and TTE to assess three key domains (mitral valve (MV) anatomy and systolic anterior motion, visualisation of target septum, adjacent structures) was evaluated in 20 consecutive patients undergoing ASA. Two independent experts scored paired TTE and ICE images off line for each domain in both groups. The ability to see myocardial contrast following septal arterial injection was also assessed by the cardiologist performing ASA. In patients undergoing ASA, ICE was superior in viewing MV anatomy (P=0.02). TTE was superior in assessing adjacent structures (P=0.002). There was no difference in assessing target septum. Myocardial contrast: ICE did not clearly identify the area of contrast in 17/19 patients due to dense acoustic shadowing (8/19) and inadequate opacification of the myocardium (6/19). ICE only clearly localised contrast in 2/19 cases. ICE does not visualise myocardial contrast well and therefore cannot be used to guide ASA. TTE was substantially better at viewing myocardial contrast. There was no significant difference between ICE and TTE in the overall ability to comment on cardiac anatomy relevant to ASA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cooper et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM) (n=20). Intra-cardiac echocardiography (ICE) vs. Trans-thoracic echocardiography (TTE) was evaluated on Mitral valve and systolic anterior motion visualization score (work view, 0-2 scale) (p=0.02). Intra-cardiac echocardiography was superior to trans-thoracic echocardiography for viewing mitral valve anatomy (score 1.88 vs 1.60, p=0.02) but failed to adequately visualize myocardial contrast to guide alcohol septal ablation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: