1. Beyond Static Planning: Computational Predictive Modeling to Avoid Coronary Artery Occlusion in TAVR.
- Author
-
Holst K, Becker T, Magruder JT, Yadav P, Stewart J, Rajagopal V, Liu S, Polsani V, Dasi LP, and Thourani VH
- Subjects
- Humans, Female, Male, Aged, 80 and over, Aged, Retrospective Studies, Risk Assessment, Computer Simulation, Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement methods, Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement adverse effects, Aortic Valve Stenosis surgery, Coronary Occlusion etiology, Coronary Occlusion prevention & control, Coronary Occlusion surgery, Coronary Occlusion diagnosis
- Abstract
Background: Coronary artery occlusion (CO) during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a devastating complication. The objective of this study was to assess the clinical impact of a computational predictive modeling algorithm for CO during TAVR planning., Methods: From January 2020 to December 2022, 116 patients (7.6%) who underwent TAVR evaluation were deemed to be at increased risk of CO on the basis of traditional criteria. Patients underwent prospective computational modeling (DASI Simulations) to assess their risk of CO during TAVR; procedural modifications and clinical results were reviewed retrospectively., Results: Of the 116 patients at risk for CO by traditional methodology, 53 had native aortic valve stenosis (45.7%), 47 had undergone previous surgical AVR (40.5%), and 16 had undergone previous TAVR (13.8%). Transcatheter valve choice, size, or implantation depth was modeled for all patients. Computational modeling predicted an increased risk of CO in 39 of 116 (31.9%) patients. Within this subcohort, 29 patients proceeded with TAVR. Procedural modifications to augment the risk of CO included bioprosthetic or native aortic scallop intentional laceration to prevent iatrogenic coronary artery obstruction during TAVR (n = 10), chimney coronary stents (n = 8), and coronary access without stents (n = 3). There were no episodes of coronary artery compromise among patients after TAVR, either for those predicted to be at high risk of CO (with procedural modifications) or those predicted to be at low risk (standard TAVR)., Conclusions: The use of preoperative simulations for TAVR in patient-specific geometry through computational predictive modeling of CO is an effective enhancement to procedure planning., Competing Interests: Disclosures Taylor Becker reports a relationship with DASI Simulations that includes: consulting or advisory. Pradeep Yadav reports a relationship with Edwards Lifesciences that includes: consulting or advisory and speaking and lecture fees; with Abbott Vascular that includes: consulting or advisory and speaking and lecture fees; with Boston Scientific that includes: consulting or advisory; with DASI Simulations that includes: equity or stocks; with Edwards Lifesciences that includes: funding grants; with Abbott Vascular that includes: funding grants; with Boston Scientific that includes: funding grants; with Medtronic that includes: funding grants; with JenaValve Technology that includes: funding grants; with Trisol Medical that includes: funding grants; with HighLife that includes: funding grants; with Innovalve that includes: funding grants; and with CroiValve that includes: funding grants. Vivek Rajagopal reports a relationship with Opus Medical Therapies that includes: equity or stocks. Venkateshwar Polsani reports a relationship with DASI Simulations that includes: board membership. Lakshmi Prasad Dasi reports a relationship with DASI Simulations that includes: board membership and equity or stocks; and reports holding patent PCT/US2022/072784. Vinod H. Thourani reports a relationship with Abbott Vascular that includes: consulting or advisory and speaking and lecture fees; with Artivion that includes: consulting or advisory and speaking and lecture fees; with AtriCure that includes: consulting or advisory; with Boston Scientific that includes: consulting or advisory; with CroiValve that includes: consulting or advisory; with Edwards Lifesciences that includes: funding grants; with JenaValve Technology that includes: consulting or advisory and speaking and lecture fees; with DASI Simulations that includes: equity or stocks; with Abbott Vascular that includes: funding grants; with Artivion that includes: funding grants; with AtriCure that includes: funding grants; with Boston Scientific that includes: funding grants; with CroiValve that includes: funding grants; with Edwards Lifesciences that includes: funding grants; with Medtronic that includes: funding grants; and with Trisol that includes: funding grants. All other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
- Published
- 2025
- Full Text
- View/download PDF