Background
Echocardiography is regarded as the gold standard for diagnosis of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), yet diagnostic accuracy has been evaluated previously only in single‐center studies. We systematically evaluated the accuracy of BAV diagnosis in a large healthcare system of multiple echocardiography laboratories.
Methods and Results
Aurora Health Care is a multihospital, multi‐clinic system across the state of Wisconsin encompassing 33 inpatient and outpatient echocardiography laboratories with 39 cardiologist readers and 72 sonographers. As all laboratories store echocardiograms in one database, we queried all patients with “bicuspid aortic valve” diagnosis on echocardiography. Echocardiograms were classified as “BAV” or “possible BAV” based on initial reader confidence. An expert review panel categorized each as BAV, no BAV, or Indeterminate. Of the 745 cases identified, 589 (79.1%, initial reader interpretation: n = 494 “BAV,” n = 95 “possible”) were BAV. A high level of agreement (84%) was present in BAV diagnosis. There were 156 (20.9%) echocardiograms that were no BAV (8.4%) or Indeterminate (12.4%). We identified three common reasons for misdiagnosis: poor image quality (n = 70, 44.9%), leaflet calcium (n = 44, 28.2%), and oblique axis imaging (n = 33, 21.1%). A clear reason for misclassification was not elucidated in nine cases (n = 9, 5.7%).
Conclusions
This is the first study to evaluate BAV accuracy across a community health system with multiple echocardiography laboratories and a heterogeneous group of readers and sonographers. We establish a high degree of accuracy of echocardiography in BAV diagnosis and draw attention to common echocardiographic pitfalls that lead to BAV misclassification, highlighting opportunities for education and quality improvement.
BackgroundWhile transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has traditionally been supported intraprocedurally by transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE), transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is increasingly being used. We evaluated echocardiographic imaging characteristics and clinical outcomes in patients who underwent TTE during TAVI (TTE-TAVI).Methods and resultsA select team of dedicated sonographers and interventional echocardiographers performed TTE-TAVI in 278 patients, all of whom underwent TAVI through transfemoral access. We implanted the Medtronic EVOLUT R valve in 258 patients (92.8%). TTE images were acquired immediately pre-procedure by a dedicated sonographer in the cardiac catheterization laboratory with the patient in the supine position. TTE was then performed post deployment of TAVI. In the procedure, TTE image quality was fair or better in 249 (89.6%) cases. Color-flow Doppler was adequate or better in 275 (98.9%) cases. In 2 cases, paravalvular regurgitation (PVL) could not be assessed confidently by echocardiography due to poor image quality; in those cases, PVL was assessed by fluoroscopy, aortic root injection and invasive hemodynamics. Both TTE and invasive hemodynamics were used in the assessment of need for post-deployment stent ballooning (n = 23, 8.3%). TTE adequately recognized new pericardial effusion in 3 cases. No case required TOE conversion for image quality. There was only 1 case of intraprocedural TTE failing to recognize moderate PVL, without clinical implication. In 99% of patients, TTE-TAVI adequately assessed PVL compared with 24-h and 1-month follow-up TTE.ConclusionsWith the current generation of TAVI, TTE-TAVI is adequate intraprocedurally when performed by specialized sonographers and dedicated cardiologists in a highly experienced TAVI center.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.