The American journal of cardiology
-
Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Impact of Hospital Volume on Outcomes of Endovascular Stenting for Adult Aortic Coarctation.
Use of transcatheter endovascular stenting has been increasing in the treatment of coarctation of aorta (CoA). The present study was undertaken on adults with CoA who underwent stent placement from 2000 to 2011 to analyze the relation of hospital volumes to the outcomes of stenting in adults with CoA. It was a retrospective study based on Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2000 to 2011 and identified subjects using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification procedure code of 747.10 (CoA). ⋯ Shorter LOS and lower cost were observed with annual hospital volume of ≥3 procedures. In conclusion, stenting adults for CoA is remarkably safe, and the outcomes of the procedure have improved in centers with annual hospital volume of ≥3 procedures. There is also decreasing trend of procedure-related complications, shorter LOS, and lower costs compared to centers with annual volume <3 procedures.
-
Comparative Study
Quantitative Evaluation of Mitral Regurgitation Secondary to Mitral Valve Prolapse by Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Echocardiography.
The present prospective study was designed to evaluate the accuracy of quantitative assessment of mitral regurgitant fraction (MRF) by echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI) in the modern era using as reference method the blinded multiparametric integrative assessment of mitral regurgitation (MR) severity. 2-Dimensional (2D) and 3-dimensional (3D) MRF by echocardiography (2D echo MRF and 3D echo MRF) were obtained by measuring the difference in left ventricular (LV) total stroke volume (obtained from either 2D or 3D acquisition) and aortic forward stroke volume normalized to LV total stroke volume. MRF was calculated by cMRI using either (1) (LV stroke volume - systolic aortic outflow volume by phase contrast)/LV stroke volume (cMRI MRF [volumetric]) or (2) (mitral inflow volume - systolic aortic outflow volume)/mitral inflow volume (cMRI MRF [phase contrast]). Six patients had 1 + MR, 6 patients had 2 + MR, 12 patients had 3 + MR, and 10 had 4 + MR. ⋯ The accuracy of MRF for the diagnosis of MR ≥3+ or 4+ was the highest with cMRI MRF (volumetric) (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.98), followed by 3D echo MRF (AUC = 0.96), 2D echo MRF (AUC = 0.90), and cMRI MRF (phase contrast; AUC = 0.83). In conclusion, MRF by cMRI (volumetric method) and 3D echo MRF had the highest diagnostic value to detect significant MR, whereas the diagnostic value of 2D echo MRF and cMRI MRF (phase contrast) was lower. Hence, the present study suggests that both cMRI (volumetric method) and 3D echo represent best approaches for calculating MRF.