三种影像学测量技术对左心耳封堵器尺寸选择的指导价值

  目的  初步探讨CT血管造影(CT angiography, CTA)、经食管超声心动图(transesophageal echocardio-graphy, TEE)和术中数字减影血管造影(digital subtraction angiography, DSA)3种方法测量左心耳开口直径对选择适宜尺寸左心耳封堵器的指导价值。  方法  回顾性收集2015年12月1日至2019年3月31日在解放军总医院第一医学中心接受经皮左心耳封堵术的非瓣膜性房颤患者临床资料。所有入选患者同时采用CTA、TEE、DSA 3种方法测量左心耳开口直径, 记录植入封堵器尺寸, 采用Pearson相关性分析比较3种方法测量值与植入封堵器尺寸的相关性, 采用Bland-Altman一致性分析法比较3种方法测量值与所植入封堵器尺寸的一致性。  结果  共102例符合纳入和排除标准的患者入选本研究, 均成功植入WATCHMAN封堵器。平均年龄(70.1±9.8)岁, CHA2DS2-VASc评分(评估非瓣膜性房颤成年患者发生卒中的风险)为(5.11±1.43)分, HAS-BLED评分(评估出血风险)(3.61±1.18)分。CTA测量左心耳开口直径(22.51±3.55)mm]与DSA(22.22±3.73)mm]接近, 无统计学差异(q=0.81, P=0.12), 两种方法的测量值均大于TEE(20.82±0.36)mm, P均 < 0.01]。封堵器尺寸与CTA、DSA、TEE测量的左心耳开口直径呈正相关(r=0.93、0.87、0.83, P均 < 0.01)。封堵器尺寸与CTA测量值的一致性界限最窄(-7.83 mm, -2.56 mm), 差值为(-5.19±1.35)mm, 95%置信区间为(-5.46 mm, -4.93 mm); 与TEE测量值的一致性界限最宽(-11.00 mm, -2.77 mm), 差值为(-6.88±2.10)mm, 95%置信区间为(-7.29 mm, -6.47 mm)。  结论  CTA、DSA、TEE测量左心耳开口直径能为选择左心耳封堵器适宜尺寸提供较好依据, 其中CTA测量值与封堵器尺寸的相关性和一致性最佳。

Value of Three Imaging Modalities for the Size Selection of Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device

  Objective  The aim of this study was to primarily explore the value of CT angiography (CTA), transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), and intraoperative digital subtraction angiography (DSA) in measuring the orifice diameter of the left atrial appendage for selecting the appropriate size of a closure device.  Methods  Clinical data of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation who underwent percutaneous left atrial appendage closure from December 1, 2015 to March 31, 2019 in The First Medical Center of People'sLiberation Army General Hospital were retrospectively collected. The orifice diameters of left atrial appendage were measured by CTA, TEE, and DSA simultaneously; the size of the device was recorded. The relationship between the measurement result of either method and the device size was analyzed using Pearson's correlation, and the Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess the concordance between the measurement of each method and the device size.  Results  Totally 102 patients meeting the inclusive and exclusive criteria were enrolled in this study. All patients received successful implantation of left atrial appendage device, with the mean age of (70.1±9.8)years, the CHA2DS2-VASc score (estimatiing the stroke risk for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in adults) of 5.11±1.43, and the HAS-BLED score (assessing the bleeding risk) of 3.61±1.18. There was no significant difference in the diameter measurement of the left atrial appendage orifice between CTA and DSA(22.51±3.55)mm vs. (22.22±3.73)mm, q=0.81, P=0.12]; while both measurements were greater than that of TEE(20.82±3.63)mm, both P < 0.01]. There were good correlations between the CTA, DSA, TEE, and device size (r=0.93, 0.87, 0.83, respectively, all P < 0.01). In the Bland-Altman plots, the narrowest limits of agreement were shown in the correlation of the device size and CTA measurements (-7.83 mm, -2.56 mm), the difference was (-5.19±1.35)mm, and the 95% confidence interval was (-5.46 mm, -4.93 mm); while the widest was in the correlation of the device size and TEE measurements (-11.00 mm, -2.77 mm), the difference was (-6.88±2.10)mm, and the 95% confidence interval was (-7.29 mm, -6.47 mm).  Conclusion  s For the selection of WATCHMAN closure device, CTA, DSA, and TEE might provide valuable reference measurements. Among the three imaging modalities, the relevance and concordance of CTA measurements are the best.