RSNA 2008 

Abstract Archives of the RSNA, 2008


SSA02-05

CT Characterization of Stenotic Aortic Valve

Scientific Papers

Presented on November 30, 2008
Presented as part of SSA02: Cardiac (Valves and Atrial Appendages: CT vs MR/Echocardiography)

Participants

Baskaran Sundaram MBBS, Presenter: Research grant, Bayer AG
Troy LaBounty, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose
Elina Yamada, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose
Prachi Agarwal MD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose
William Armstrong MD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose
Ella A. Kazerooni MD, Abstract Co-Author: Consultant, General Electric Company Consultant, Vital Images, Inc Research funded, General Electric Company

PURPOSE

To compare AV characteristics between CT and Transesophageal Echocardiography (TEE)

METHOD AND MATERIALS

This is a HIPPA compliant IRB approved retrospective comparison of AV characteristics between dynamic CT and TEE in 77 patients with AS. Grades of AV leaflet calcification (0-4), mobility (0-2), thickness (0-4) and number of leaflets (2 or 3) were blindly and independently (2 CT and 1 TEE readers) evaluated.

RESULTS

For AV calcification, CT readers substantially agreed (within 1 grade in 75/77 pts, k=0.72), and each had fair agreement with TEE (within 1 grade in 59/77 and 58/77 pts, k= 0.34 and 0.39). For AV mobility, CT readers had moderate agreement (64/77 pts, k=0.58) and individually with TEE (61/77 and 57/77 pts, k=0.53 and 0.48). For AV leaflet thickness, CT readers moderately agreed (within 1 grade in 70/77 pts, k=0.44), and each had fair agreement each with TEE (within 1 grade in 66/77 and 60/77 pts, k=0.24 and 0.26). CT had mean sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 81% to diagnose bicuspid valve with substantial agreement between CT readers (68/74 pts, k=0.84) and between CT readers and TEE (56/68 and 59/69 pts, k=0.65 and 0.71).

CONCLUSION

AV assessment using dynamic CT is feasible and it determines leaflet morphology precisely. CT grading of AV calcifications, mobility, and thickening has fair to moderate agreement with TEE.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE/APPLICATION

Aortic valve (AV) morphology has prognostic implications. Preop knowledge of AV features in Aortic Stenosis (AS) helps to decide repair vs replacement(AVR), correct AVR procedure and the AV prosthesis

Cite This Abstract

Sundaram, B, LaBounty, T, Yamada, E, Agarwal, P, Armstrong, W, Kazerooni, E, CT Characterization of Stenotic Aortic Valve.  Radiological Society of North America 2008 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, February 18 - February 20, 2008 ,Chicago IL. http://archive.rsna.org/2008/6012947.html