-
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology :... May 2022Fetal aortic valvuloplasty (FAV) has become a treatment option for critical fetal aortic stenosis (AS) with the goal of preserving biventricular circulation (BVC);... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Fetal aortic valvuloplasty (FAV) has become a treatment option for critical fetal aortic stenosis (AS) with the goal of preserving biventricular circulation (BVC); however, to date, it is unclear how many patients undergoing FAV achieve BVC. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the type of postnatal circulation achieved following FAV.
METHODS
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched systematically for studies investigating postnatal circulation in patients with AS following FAV. Eligible for inclusion were original papers in the English language, published from 2000 to 2020, with at least 12 months of follow-up after birth. Review papers, abstracts, expert opinions, books, editorials and case reports were excluded. The titles and abstracts of all retrieved literature were screened, duplicates were excluded and the full texts of potentially eligible articles were obtained and assessed. The primary endpoint was type of postnatal circulation. Additional assessed outcomes included fetal death, live birth, neonatal death (NND), termination of pregnancy (TOP) and technical success of the FAV procedure. The quality of articles was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool. To estimate the overall proportion of each endpoint, meta-analysis of proportions was employed using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
The electronic search identified 579 studies, of which seven were considered eligible for inclusion in the systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 266 fetuses underwent FAV with median follow-up per study from 12 months to 13.2 years. There were no maternal deaths and only one case of FAV-related maternal complication was reported. Hydrops was present in 29 (11%) patients. The pooled prevalence of BVC and univentricular circulation (UVC) among liveborn patients was 45.8% (95% CI, 39.2-52.4%) and 43.6% (95% CI, 33.9-53.8%), respectively. The pooled prevalence of technically successful FAV procedure was 82.1% (95% CI, 74.3-87.9%), of fetal death it was 16.0% (95% CI, 11.2-22.4%), of TOP 5.7% (95% CI, 2.0-15.5%), of live birth 78.8% (95% CI, 66.5-87.4%), of NND 8.7% (95% CI, 4.7-15.5%), of palliative care 4.0% (95% CI, 1.9-8.4%) and of infant death 10.3% (95% CI, 3.6-26.1%). The pooled prevalence of BVC and UVC among liveborn patients who had technically successful FAV was 51.9% (95% CI, 44.7-59.1%) and 39.8% (95% CI, 29.7-50.9%), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
This study showed a BVC rate of 46% among liveborn patients with AS undergoing FAV, which improved to 52% when subjects underwent technically successful FAV. Given the lack of randomized clinical trials, results should be interpreted with caution. Currently, data do not suggest a true benefit of FAV for achieving BVC. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Topics: Aortic Valve Stenosis; Balloon Valvuloplasty; Female; Fetal Death; Fetal Heart; Humans; Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 34726817
DOI: 10.1002/uog.24807 -
Open Heart Aug 2023Assessment of frailty prior to aortic valve intervention is recommended in European and North American valvular heart disease guidelines. However, there is a lack of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Assessment of frailty prior to aortic valve intervention is recommended in European and North American valvular heart disease guidelines. However, there is a lack of consensus on how it is best measured. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a well-validated measure of frailty that is relatively quick to calculate. This meta-analysis sought to examine whether the CFS predicts mortality and morbidity following either transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).
METHODS
Nine electronic databases were searched systematically for data on clinical outcomes post-TAVI/SAVR, where patients had undergone preoperative frailty assessment using the CFS. The primary endpoint was 12-month mortality. TAVI and SAVR data were assessed and reported separately. For each individual study, the incidence of adverse outcomes was extracted according to a CFS score of 5-9 (ie, frail) versus 1-4 (ie, non-frail), with meta-analysis performed using a random effects model.
RESULTS
Of 2612 records screened, nine were included in the review (five TAVI, three SAVR and one which included both interventions). Among 4923 TAVI patients, meta-analysis showed 12-month mortality rates of 19.1% for the frail cohort versus 9.8% for the non-frail cohort (RR 2.53 (1.63 to 3.95), p<0.001, I=83%). For the smaller cohort of SAVR patients (n=454), mortality rates were 20.3% versus 3.9% for the frail and non-frail cohorts, respectively (RR 5.08 (2.31 to 11.15), p<0.001, I=5%).
CONCLUSIONS
Frailty, as determined by the CFS, was associated with an increased mortality risk in the 12 months following either TAVI or SAVR. These data would support its use in the preoperative assessment of elderly patients undergoing aortic valve interventions.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Frailty; Risk Factors; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
PubMed: 37567604
DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2023-002354 -
Journal of Cardiovascular Development... Apr 2023(1) Background: The use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis is expanding significantly. We aimed to...
(1) Background: The use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis is expanding significantly. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis comparing the safety and efficacy of TAVI versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) during the early and mid-term follow-up period. (2) Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing 1- to 2-year outcomes between TAVI and SAVR. The study protocol was preregistered in PROSPERO and the results were reported according to PRISMA guidelines. (3) Results: The pooled analysis included data from eight RCTs totaling 8780 patients. TAVI was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke (OR 0.87, 95%CI 0.77-0.99), significant bleeding (OR 0.38, 95%CI 0.25-0.59), acute kidney injury (AKI; OR 0.53, 95%CI 0.40-0.69) and atrial fibrillation (OR 0.28, 95%CI 0.19-0.43). SAVR was associated with a lower risk of major vascular complication (MVC; OR 1.99, 95%CI 1.29-3.07) as well as permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI; OR 2.28, 95%CI 1.45-3.57). (3) Conclusions: TAVI compared with SAVR during early and mid-term follow-up was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke, significant bleeding, AKI and atrial fibrillation; however, it was associated with a higher risk of MVC and PPI.
PubMed: 37103036
DOI: 10.3390/jcdd10040157 -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders Oct 2023To compare functional and health related quality of life outcomes post-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparing functional and quality of life outcomes in transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
To compare functional and health related quality of life outcomes post-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with critical aortic stenosis (AS) across low to high-risk surgical candidates. These patient-centred factors will be compared between both groups in the short to medium term time frames and will aid in shared decision making between patients and healthcare workers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials which compared TAVI with SAVR and reported on quality of life (QoL) and functional scores. The scores used were the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), Euroqol-5DL (EQ5DL), the short form-36/12 (SF-36/12) and the NYHA.
RESULTS
We identified eight trials with a total of 8898 participants. Both groups showed improvements from baseline at one month. At one month there was a statistically significant difference in standardised mean difference (SMD) in favour of TAVI for EQ5DL (SMD 0.37, 95% CI 0.26,0.49), KCCQ (SMD 0.53,95% CI 0.48, 0.58), SF physical summary (SMD 0.55, 95% CI 0.31 - 0.78) and SF mental summary (SMD 0.34, 95% CI 0.27 - 0.40). At one year there was no statistically significant difference between any of these QoL metrics. For NYHA, no significant difference in odds ratio of class III/IV was observed at one month between TAVI and SAVR (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.83, 1.07), however, TAVI was associated with reduced odds ratio of NYHA class I/II at one year (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78, 0.98).
CONCLUSION
Both groups were associated with improvements in QoL and functional outcomes with TAVI reporting more significant improvements in QoL at one-month post-procedures. No significant improvements between groups were seen at one year. This is the largest meta-analysis comparing post-operative health-related quality of life outcomes post SAVR and TAVI and has major implications in shared decision making for the treatment of aortic stenosis.
Topics: Humans; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Aortic Valve; Quality of Life; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Treatment Outcome; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Risk Factors
PubMed: 37880616
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-023-03445-y -
JAMA Network Open Jan 2023Recent European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (ESC/EACTS) guidelines highlighted some concerns about the randomized clinical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Recent European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (ESC/EACTS) guidelines highlighted some concerns about the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for aortic stenosis. Quantification of these biases has not been previously performed.
OBJECTIVE
To assess whether randomization protects RCTs comparing TAVI and SAVR from biases other than nonrandom allocation.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic review of the literature between January 1, 2007, and June 6, 2022, on MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed. Specialist websites were also checked for unpublished data.
STUDY SELECTION
The study included RCTs with random allocation to TAVI or SAVR with a maximum 5-year follow-up.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data extraction was performed by 2 independent investigators following the PRISMA guidelines. A random-effects meta-analysis was used for quantifying pooled rates and differential rates between treatments of deviation from random assigned treatment (DAT), loss to follow-up, and receipt of additional treatments.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcomes were the proportion of DAT, loss to follow-up, and patients who were provided additional treatments and myocardial revascularization, together with their ratio between treatments. The measures were the pooled overall proportion of the primary outcomes and the risk ratio (RR) in the TAVI vs SAVR groups.
RESULTS
The search identified 8 eligible trials including 8849 participants randomly assigned to undergo TAVI (n = 4458) or SAVR (n = 4391). The pooled proportion of DAT among the sample was 4.2% (95% CI, 3.0%-5.6%), favoring TAVI (pooled RR vs SAVR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.08-0.36; P < .001). The pooled proportion of loss to follow-up was 4.8% (95% CI, 2.7%-7.3%). Meta-regression showed a significant association between the proportion of participants lost to follow-up and follow-up time (slope, 0.042; 95% CI, 0.017-0.066; P < .001). There was an imbalance of loss to follow-up favoring TAVI (RR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.28-0.55; P < .001). The pooled proportion of patients who had additional procedures was 10.4% (95% CI, 4.4%-18.5%): 4.6% (95% CI, 1.5%-9.3%) in the TAVI group and 16.5% (95% CI, 7.5%-28.1%) in the SAVR group (RR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.15-0.50; P < .001). The imbalance between groups also favored TAVI for additional myocardial revascularization (RR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.24-0.68; P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This study suggests that, in RCTs comparing TAVI vs SAVR, there are substantial proportions of DAT, loss to follow-up, and additional procedures together with systematic selective imbalance in the same direction characterized by significantly lower proportions of patients undergoing TAVI that might affect internal validity.
Topics: Humans; Aortic Valve; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Risk Factors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Bias
PubMed: 36595294
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.49321 -
International Journal of Surgery... Aug 2023Whether there are differences among the new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices for patients with aortic stenosis remains unclear. The aim... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparisons of different new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation devices for patients with severe aortic stenosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Whether there are differences among the new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices for patients with aortic stenosis remains unclear. The aim of the study was to compare the efficiency and safety of different new-generation TAVI devices for patients with aortic stenosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase and Web of Science from their inception to 1 February 2022. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies that compared two or more different TAVI devices were enroled. Pairwise meta-analysis and frequentist network meta-analysis were conducted to pool the outcome estimates of interest.
RESULTS
A total of 79 studies were finally included. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking, the top two ranked valves for lower rates of events were as follows: direct flow medical (DFM) (4.6%) and Lotus (48.8%) for lower rate of device success; Sapien 3 (16.8%) and DFM (19.7%) for lower mortality; DFM (8.6%) and Sapien 3 (25.5%) for lower rates of stroke; Evolut (27.6%) and DFM (35.8%) for lower rates of major and life-threatening bleeding; Portico (22.6%) and Sapien 3 (41.9%) for lower rates of acute kidney injury; Acurate (8.6%) and DFM (13.2%) for lower rates of permanent pacemaker implantation; Lotus (0.3%) and Sapien 3 (22.7%) for lower rates of paravalvular leak; Evolut (1.4%) and Portico (29.1%) for lower rates of mean aortic valve gradients.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings of the present study suggested that the device success rates were comparable among these new-generation valves except for DFM. After excluding DFM, Sapien 3 might be the best effective for decreased mortality and stroke; Lotus might be the best effective for decreased paravalvular leak; Evolut might be the best effective for decreased major and life-threatening bleeding and mean aortic valve gradients; Acurate and Portico might be the best effective for decreased permanent pacemaker implantation and acute kidney injury, respectively.
Topics: Humans; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Aortic Valve; Network Meta-Analysis; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Prosthesis Design; Severity of Illness Index; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Stroke; Acute Kidney Injury
PubMed: 37161443
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000456 -
PloS One 2018Symptomatic aortic stenosis has a poor prognosis. Many patients are considered inoperable or at high surgical risk for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR),... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Symptomatic aortic stenosis has a poor prognosis. Many patients are considered inoperable or at high surgical risk for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), reflecting their age, comorbidities and frailty. The clinical effectiveness and safety of TAVI have not been reviewed systematically for these high levels of surgical risk. This systematic review compares mortality and other important clinical outcomes up to 5 years post treatment following TAVI or other treatment in these risk groups.
METHODS
A systematic review protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42016048396). The Cochrane Library, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination Databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ZETOC were searched from January 2002 to August 2016. Clinical trials or matched studies comparing TAVI with other treatments for AS in patients surgically inoperable or operable at a high risk were included. Data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by two reviewers. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. The main outcomes were all-cause mortality, efficacy and major complications.
RESULTS
Three good quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Patients' mean age ranged from 83-85 years, around half were female and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III or IV ranged from 83.8% to 94.2% with frequent comorbidities. In 358 surgically inoperable patients from one RCT, TAVI was superior to medical therapy for all-cause mortality at 1 year (hazard ratio (HR) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36-0.92), 2 years (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.39-0.65), 3 years (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.41to 0.68) and 5 years (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.39-0.65), and NYHA class III or IV at 2 years (TAVI 16.8% (16/95), medical therapy 57.5% (23/40), p<0.001), quality of life and re-hospitalisation. TAVI had higher risks of major bleeding up to 1 year, of stroke up to 3 years (at one year 11.2% versus 5.5%, p = .06; HR at 2 years 2.79, 95% CI 1.25-6.22; HR at 3 years 2.81; 95% CI 1.26-6.26) and of major vascular complication at 3 years (HR 8.27, 95% CI 2.92-23.44). Using the GRADE tool, this evidence was considered to be of moderate quality. In a meta-analysis including 1,494 high risk surgically operable patients from two non-inferiority RCTs TAVI showed no significant differences from SAVR in all-cause mortality at two years (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.82-1.29) and up to 5 years (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.83-1.12). There were no statistically significant differences in major vascular complications and myocardial infarction at any time point, discrepant results for major bleeding on variable definitions and no differences in stroke rate at any time point. Using the GRADE tool, this evidence was considered of low quality.
CONCLUSIONS
Symptomatic aortic stenosis can be lethal without intervention but surgical resection is contraindicated for some patients and high risk for others. We found that all-cause mortality up to 5 years of follow-up did not differ significantly between TAVI and SAVR in patients surgically operable at a high risk, but favoured TAVI over medical therapy in patients surgically inoperable. TAVI is a viable life-extending treatment option in these surgical high risk groups.
Topics: Aged, 80 and over; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Female; Humans; MEDLINE; Male; Risk Factors; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
PubMed: 29746546
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196877 -
JACC. Cardiovascular Interventions Aug 2022The clinical course of patients with moderate aortic stenosis (AS) remains incompletely defined. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The clinical course of patients with moderate aortic stenosis (AS) remains incompletely defined.
OBJECTIVES
This study sought to analyze the clinical course of moderate AS and compare it with other stages of the disease.
METHODS
Multiple electronic databases were searched to identify studies on adult moderate AS. Random-effects models were used to derive pooled estimates. The primary endpoint was all-cause death. The secondary endpoints were cardiac death, heart failure, sudden death, and aortic valve replacement.
RESULTS
Among a total of 25 studies (12,143 moderate AS patients, 3.7 years of follow-up), pooled rates per 100 person-years were 9.0 (95% CI: 6.9 to 11.7) for all-cause death, 4.9 (95% CI: 3.1 to 7.5) for cardiac death, 3.9 (95% CI: 1.9 to 8.2) for heart failure, 1.1 (95% CI: 0.8 to 1.5) for sudden death, and 7.2 (95% CI: 4.3 to 12.2) for aortic valve replacement. Meta-regression analyses detected that diabetes (P = 0.019), coronary artery disease (P = 0.017), presence of symptoms (P < 0.001), and left ventricle (LV) dysfunction (P = 0.009) were associated with a significant impact on the overall estimate of all-cause death. All-cause mortality was higher in patients with reduced LV ejection fraction (<50%) than with normal LV ejection fraction: 16.5 (95% CI: 5.2 to 52.3) and 4.2 (95% CI: 1.4 to 12.8) per 100 person-years, respectively. Compared with moderate AS, the incidence rate difference of all-cause mortality was -3.9 (95% CI: -6.7 to -1.1) for no or mild AS and +2.2 (95% CI: +0.8 to +3.5) for severe AS patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Moderate AS appears to be associated with a mortality risk higher than no or mild AS but lower than severe AS, which increases in specific population subsets. The impact of early intervention in moderate AS patients having high-risk features deserves further investigation.
Topics: Aortic Valve Stenosis; Death; Death, Sudden; Heart Failure; Humans; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35981841
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.06.022 -
Medicine Jul 2023Currently, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is presently a recognized treatment modality for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are often old,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Currently, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is presently a recognized treatment modality for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are often old, disabled, frail, and have low exercise capacity (ExCap). It is further expected from this therapy to improve quality of life by improving of the cardio function performance. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) on patients after TAVI.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from inception to December 10, 2022 for relevant studies that evaluated the effect of CR on patients after TAVI. The primary outcome was the improvement of 6-minute walked distance and Barthel index score after CR. The secondary outcomes included other parameters such as SF-12 scale, HADS score, Morse Fall Scale, Frailty-Index, ExCap, and FIM score. All statistical analyses were performed using the standard statistical procedures provided in Review Manager 5.2.
RESULTS
A total of 12 observational studies were identified, with 2365 participants. Pooled data indicated that CR programmers significantly improved the 6-minute walked distance (SMD 0.65; 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.51-0.79) and Barthel index score (SMD 0.83; 95% CI 0.61-1.06). In addition, compared with admission, patients experienced significant improvement in SF-12 scale at CR discharge, with a pooled mean differences (MD) of 2.74 (95% CI 0.86-4.61) in physical component score and 2.76 (95% CI 0.59-4.93) in mental component score. Similar results were also observed in ExCap (MD 8.10 W; 95% CI 1.57 W-14.63 W) and FIM score (MD 11.0; 95% CI 6.22-15.78).
CONCLUSIONS
Our analysis indicated that exercise-based CR programmers had significant effect on patients after TAVI in improving exercise tolerance and functional independence.
Topics: Humans; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Cardiac Rehabilitation; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome; Aortic Valve
PubMed: 37505146
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034478 -
Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging Apr 2023Minimizing contrast dose and radiation exposure while maintaining image quality during computed tomography angiography (CTA) for transcatheter aortic valve replacement...
BACKGROUND
Minimizing contrast dose and radiation exposure while maintaining image quality during computed tomography angiography (CTA) for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is desirable, but not well established. This systematic review compares image quality for low contrast and low kV CTA versus conventional CTA in patients with aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR planning.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature review to identify clinical studies comparing imaging strategies for patients with aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR planning. The primary outcomes of image quality as assessed by the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were reported as random effects mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
We included 6 studies reporting on 353 patients. There was no difference in cardiac SNR (mean difference, -1.42; 95% CI, -5.71 to 2.88; p = 0.52), cardiac CNR (mean difference, -3.83; 95% CI, -9.98 to 2.32; p = 0.22), aortic SNR (mean difference, -0.23; 95% CI, -7.83 to 7.37; p = 0.95), aortic CNR (mean difference, -3.95; 95% CI, -12.03 to 4.13; p = 0.34), and ileofemoral SNR (mean difference, -6.09; 95% CI, -13.80 to 1.62; p = 0.12) between the low dose and conventional protocols. There was a difference in ileofemoral CNR between the low dose and conventional protocols with a mean difference of -9.26 (95% CI, -15.06 to -3.46; p = 0.002). Overall, subjective image quality was similar between the 2 protocols.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review suggests that low contrast and low kV CTA for TAVR planning provides similar image quality to conventional CTA.
PubMed: 37096677
DOI: 10.4250/jcvi.2022.0108