Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Repair, Imaging, and Electronic Imaging Health Record

  • Cardiac PET, CT, and MRI (S Achenbach, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Cardiology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Degenerative aortic stenosis (AS) is a common valvular pathology in developed nations. Secondary to advanced age and often multiple co-morbidities, a significant percentage of patients are not considered surgical candidates. For these high-risk patients, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a rapidly emerging less-invasive treatment alternative. Because of the lack of direct exposure and visualization of the operative field, pre-procedural planning and intra-procedural guidance relies on imaging. Large 3-dimensional data files are acquired, which are reconstructed on advanced workstations during review and interpretation. Optimally, the imaging data is organized into a comprehensive digital file as an integral part of the electronic health record (EHR) following the patient. This manuscript will discuss the role of image data management in the context of TAVR.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

2-D:

Two-dimensional

3-D:

Three-dimensional

AS:

Aortic stenosis

EHR:

Electronic health record

IT:

Information technology

MDCT:

Multi-detector computed tomography

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

PACS:

Picture archiving and communication systems

SVAR:

Surgical aortic valve replacement

TAVR:

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •• Of major importance

  1. Mocumbi AO, Ferreira MB. Neglected cardiovascular diseases in Africa: challenges and opportunities. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:680–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mocumbi AO. Lack of focus on cardiovascular disease in sub-Saharan Africa. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2012;2:74–7.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Nkomo VR, Gardin JM, Skelton TN, et al. Burden of valvular heart diseases. Lancet. 2006;368:1005–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Kanu C, et al. ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines (Writing committee to revise the 1998 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:e1–148.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Iung B, Baron G, Butchart EG, et al. A prospective survey of patients with valvular heart disease in Europe: the euro heart survey on valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:1231–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kapadia SR, Goel SS, Svensson L, et al. Characterization and outcome of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis referred for percutaneous aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;137:1430–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M, et al. PARTNER trial investigators. Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1597–607.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. •• Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ, et al. PARTNER trial investigators. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2187–98. Clinical trial comparing outcome between surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Grube E, Schuler G, Buellesfeld L, et al. Percutaneous aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis in high-risk patients using the second- and current third-generation self-expanding CoreValve prosthesis: device success and 30-day clinical outcome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:69–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tamburino C, Capodanno D, Ramondo A, et al. Incidence and predictors of early and late mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in 663 patients with severe aortic stenosis. Circulation. 2011;123:299–308.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gurvitch R, Wood DA, Tay EL, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Durability of clinical and hemodynamic outcomes beyond 3 years in a large patient cohort. Circulation. 2010;122:1319–27.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Petronio AS, De Carlo M, Bedogni F, et al. Safety and efficacy of the subclavian approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the CoreValve revalving system. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:359–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Svensson LG, Dewey T, Kapadia S, et al. United States feasibility study of transcatheter insertion of a stented aortic valve by the left ventricular apex. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;86:46–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Walther T, Simon P, Dewey T, et al. Transapical minimally invasive aortic valve implantation: multicenter experience. Circulation. 2007;116:I240–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Grube E, Naber C, Abizaid A, et al. Feasibility of transcatheter aortic valve implantation without balloon pre-dilation a pilot study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:751–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. •• Messika-Zeitoun D, Serfaty JM, Brochet E, et al. Multimodal assessment of the aortic annulus diameter. Implication for transcatheter aortic valve implanation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:186–94. Study comparing aortic root measurement with CT and echocardiography.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ng ACT, Delgado V, van der Kley F, et al. Comparison of aortic root dimensions and geometries before and after transcatheter aortic valve implantation by 2-and 3-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography and multislice computed tomography. Circ Cardiovasc Imag. 2010;3:94–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Wood DA, Tops LF, Mayo JR, et al. Role of multislice computed tomography in transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Am J Cardiol. 2009;103:1295–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Siegel RJ, Luo H, Biner S. Transcatheter valve repair/implantation. Int J Cardiovasc Imag. 2011;27:1165–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. •• Schwartz JG, Neubauer AM, Fagan TE, et al. Potential role of three-dimensional rotational angiography and C-arm CT for valvular repair and implantation. Int J Cardiovasc Imag. 2011;27:1205–22. Review discussing the emerging role of rotational angiography.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. •• Schoenhagen P, Numburi U, Halliburton SS, et al. Three-dimensional imaging in the context of minimally invasive and transcatheter cardiovascular interventions using multi-detector computed tomography: from pre-operative planning to intra-operative guidance. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:2727–40. Review discussing principles of 3-D imaging in the context of transcatheter valvular procedures.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Joshi SB, Mendoza DD, Steinberg DH, et al. Ultra-low-dose intra-arterial contrast injection for iliofemoral computed tomographic angiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imag. 2009;2:1404–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kurra V, Schoenhagen P, Roselli EE, et al. Prevalence of significant peripheral artery disease in patients evaluated for percutaneous aortic valve insertion: preprocedural assessment with multidetector computed tomography. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;137:1258–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kurra V, Lieber ML, Sola S, et al. Extent of thoracic aortic atheroma burden and long-term mortality after cardiothoracic surgery: a computed tomography study. JACC Cardiovasc Imag. 2010;3:1020–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ghanem A, Müller A, Nähle CP, et al. Risk and fate of cerebral embolism after transfemoral aortic valve implantation: a prospective pilot study with diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:1427–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Chenot F, Montant P, Goffinet C, et al. Evaluation of anatomic valve opening and leaflet morphology in aortic valve bioprosthesis by using multidetector CT: comparison with transthoracic echocardiography. Radiology. 2010;255:377–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Feuchtner GM, Alkadhi H, Karlo C, et al. Cardiac CT angiography for the diagnosis of mitral valve prolapse: comparison with echocardiography1. Radiology. 2010;254:374–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Husmann L, Valenta I, Gaemperli O, et al. Feasibility of low-dose coronary CT angiography: first experience with prospective ECG-gating. Eur Heart J. 2007;29:191–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Feuchtner G, Goetti R, Plass A, et al. Dual-step prospective ECG-triggered 128-slice dual-source CT for evaluation of coronary arteries and cardiac function without heart rate control: a technical note. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:2092–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Al Ali AM, Altwegg L, Horlick EM, et al. Prevention and management of transcatheter balloon-expandable aortic valve malposition. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;72:573–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Tuzcu ME. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement malposition and embolization: innovation brings solutions also new challenges. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;72:579–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Bleiziffer S, Ruge H, Hörer J, Hutter A, et al. Predictors for new-onset complete heart block after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:524–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Tops LF, Wood DA, Delgado V, et al. Noninvasive evaluation of the aortic root with multislice computed tomography: implications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2008;1:321–30.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Akhtar M, Tuzcu EM, Kapadia SR, et al. Aortic root morphology in patients undergoing percutaneous aortic valve replacement: evidence of aortic root remodeling. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;137:950–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. •• Kempfert J, Van Linden A, Lehmkuhl L, et al. Aortic annulus sizing: echocardiographic vs. computed tomography derived measurements in comparison with direct surgical sizing. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezs064. Clinical trial discussion impact of annulus measurements of post-procedural aortic regurgitation.

  36. •• Jilaihawi H, Kashif M, Fontana G, et al. Cross-sectional computed tomographic assessment improves accuracy of aortic annular sizing for transcatheter aortic valve replacement and reduces the incidence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1275–86. Clinical trial discussion impact of annulus measurements of post-procedural aortic regurgitation.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Cueff C, Serfaty JM, Cimadevilla C, et al. Measurement of aortic valve calcification using multislice computed tomography: correlation with haemodynamic severity of aortic stenosis and clinical implication for patients with low ejection fraction. Heart. 2011;97:721–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Latsios G, Gerckens U, Buellesfeld L, et al. “Device landing zone” calcification, assessed by MSCT, as a predictive factor for pacemaker implantation after TAVI. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;76:431–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. John D, Buellesfeld L, Yuecel S, et al. Correlation of device landing zone calcification and acute procedural success in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantations with the self-expanding CoreValve prosthesis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:233–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Masson J-B, Kovac J, Schuler G, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: review of the nature, management, and avoidance of procedural complications. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2009;2:811–20.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kurra V, Kapadia S, Tuzcu M, et al. Pre-procedural imaging of aortic root orientation and dimensions comparison between X-ray angiographic planar imaging and 3-dimensional multidetector row computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2010;3:105–13.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Gurvitch R, Wood D, Leipsic J, et al. Multislice computed tomography for prediction of optimal angiographic deployment projections during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2010;3:1157–65.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Halliburton SS, Schoenhagen P. Cardiovascular imaging with computed tomography: responsible steps to balancing diagnostic yield and radiation exposure. JACC Cardiovasc Imag. 2010;3:536–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Leipsic J, Labounty TM, Heilbron B, et al. Estimated radiation dose reduction using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction in coronary CT angiography: the ERASIR study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195:655–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Moss RR, Ivens E, Pasupati S, et al. Role of echocardiography in percutaneous aortic valve implantation. J Am Coll Cardiol Imag. 2008;1:15–24.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Bahlmann E, Nienaber CA, Cramariuc D, Gohlke-Baerwolf C, Ray S, Devereux RB, et al. Aortic root geometry in aortic stenosis patients (a SEAS substudy). Eur J Echocardiogr. 2011;12:585–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. de Heer LM, Budde RP, Mali WP, et al. Aortic root dimension changes during systole and diastole: evaluation with ECG-gated multidetector row computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imag. 2011;27:1195–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. O’Brien B, Schoenhagen P, Kapadia SR, et al. Integration of three-dimensional imaging data in the assessment of aortic stenosis: impact on classification of disease severity. Circ Cardiovasc Imag. 2011;4:566–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. •• Leon MB, Piazza N, Nikolsky E, et al. Standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation clinical trials: a consensus report from the valve academic research consortium. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:134–5. Clincial consensus position paper recommending standardized endpoint definitions for TAVR outcome trials.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. •• Cowie MR, Chronaki CE, Vardas P. e-Health innovation: time for engagement with the cardiology community. Eur Heart J. 2012;Jun 24 [Epub ahead of print]. Paper discussing IT infrastructure.

  51. Fernandez-Bayo J. From PACS to the clouds. Eur J Radiol. 2011;78:250–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Gunter TD, Terry NP. The emergence of national electronic health record architectures in the United States and Australia: models, costs, and questions. J Med Internet Res. 2005;7:e3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Srinivasan M, Liederman E, Baluyot N, Jacoby R. Saving time, improving satisfaction: the impact of a digital radiology system on physician workflow and system efficiency. J Healthc Inf Manag. 2006;20(2):123–31.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Lin Y, Chen R, Guo SH, Chiang S, Chang H. Sharing personal health information via service-oriented computing: a case of long-term care. J Med Syst. 2012;36:3563–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Dickmann F, Kaspar M, Löhnhardt B, et al. Visualization in health grid environments: a novel service and business approach. In: Hutchison D, Kanade T, Kittler J, Kleinberg JM, Mattern F, Mitchell JC, et al., editors. Lecture notes in computer science. Heidelberg: Springer; 2009. p. 150–9.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Kuo AM. Opportunities and challenges of cloud computing to improve health care services. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13:e67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Pianykh OS. Digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM): a practical introduction and survival guide. 2nd ed. Heidelberg: Springer; 2012.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  58. Mell P, Grance T. The NIST definition of cloud computing. Gaithersburg: National Institute of Standards and Technology; 2011. p. 800–145. [updated 2011]. Available from: URL:http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-145/SP800-145.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Mather T, Kumaraswamy S, Latif S, Mather T, Kumaraswamy S, Latif S. Cloud security and privacy: an enterprise perspective on risks and compliance//cloud security and privacy. 1st ed. Beijing: O’Reilly; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Takabi H, Joshi J, Ahn G. Security and privacy challenges in cloud computing environments. Secur Priv IEEE. 2010;8:24–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Bertino E, Paci F, Ferrini R, Shang N. Privacy-preserving digital identity management for cloud computing. Bull IEEE Comput Soc Tech Comm Data Eng. 2009;32:21–7. Available from: URL:http://sites.computer.org/debull/A09mar/bertino.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Zibuschka J, Herbert M, Roßnagel H. Towards privacy-enhancing identity management in mashup-providing platforms. In: Hutchison D, Kanade T, Kittler J, Kleinberg JM, Mattern F, Mitchell JC, et al., editors. Lecture notes in computer science. Heidelberg: Springer; 2010. p. 273–86.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the contribution of Marion Tomasko, Graphic Department, Heart & Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic.

Disclosure

Conflicts of interest: P. Schoenhagen: none; J. Falkner: none; D. Piraino: receives royalties for surgery image registration patents; and is on the AGFA Medical Advisory Board.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cleveland Clinic, Imaging Institute and Heart & Vascular Institute, Desk J1-4, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA

    Paul Schoenhagen

  2. Cleveland Clinic, Imaging Institute, Desk A 21, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA

    David Piraino

  3. Fraunhofer Institute for Industrial Engineering IAO, Nobel Strasse 12, 70569, Stuttgart, Germany

    Juergen Falkner

Authors
  1. Paul Schoenhagen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Juergen Falkner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Piraino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Schoenhagen.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Cardiac PET, CT, and MRI

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schoenhagen, P., Falkner, J. & Piraino, D. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Repair, Imaging, and Electronic Imaging Health Record. Curr Cardiol Rep 15, 319 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-012-0319-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-012-0319-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation