Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Utility of cardiac computed tomography for evaluation of pannus in mechanical aortic valve

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The clinical significance of pannus detected on computed tomography (CT) has not yet been investigated. The purposes of this study were to investigate the clinical significance of pannus detected on cardiac CT in patients who underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) with mechanical valves, and to determine predictors for pannus severity. A total of 92 patients who underwent cardiac CT and TTE and who had undergone mechanical AVR were included. The geometric orifice area (GOA), the presence of limitation of motion (LOM) and pannus were evaluated on CT. The GOA, presence of LOM, and presence and severity of pannus were compared with echocardiographic parameters. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the predictors for pannus severity. The GOA on CT positively correlated with effective orifice area on TTE (r = 0.733, P < 0.0001). Pannus was found in 77.2 % and LOM in 14.0 %. With increasing pannus severity, mean transvalvular pressure gradient (PG) was significantly higher (P < 0.0001). Patients with elevated PG showed a smaller GOA, a higher incidence of pannus, more severe pannus and LOM than patients with normal PG (P < 0.05). Small valve size (≤19 mm), Carbomedics valve, rheumatic etiology, and young age at AVR (<48.8 years) were independent predictors of moderate to severe pannus (P < 0.05). Cardiac CT is helpful in the evaluation of pannus formation in patients with mechanical aortic valves. Moderate to severe pannus formation frequently occurred in patients with small mechanical valve size, Carbomedics valves, rheumatic heart disease and young age at AVR.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bach DS (2010) Echo/Doppler evaluation of hemodynamics after aortic valve replacement: principles of interrogation and evaluation of high gradients. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 3(3):296–304

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Habets J, Budde RP, Symersky P et al (2011) Diagnostic evaluation of left-sided prosthetic heart valve dysfunction. Nat Rev Cardiol 8(8):466–478

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sakamoto Y, Hashimoto K, Okuyama H, Ishii S, Shingo T, Kagawa H (2006) Prevalence of pannus formation after aortic valve replacement: clinical aspects and surgical management. J Artif Organs 9(3):199–202

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Teshima H, Hayashida N, Enomoto N, Aoyagi S, Okuda K, Uchida M (2003) Detection of pannus by multidetector-row computed tomography. Ann Thorac Surg 75(5):1631–1633

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Teshima H, Hayashida N, Fukunaga S et al (2004) Usefulness of a multidetector-row computed tomography scanner for detecting pannus formation. Ann Thorac Surg 77(2):523–526

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Toledano D, Acar C (2010) Usefulness of computed tomography scanning in the diagnosis of aortic prosthetic valve pannus. J Heart Valve Dis 19(5):665–668

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kassi M, Garg N, Chang SM (2013) Utility of cardiac computed tomography for assessment of prosthetic aortic valve dysfunction with pannus formation. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J 9(3):174–175

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ueda T, Teshima H, Fukunaga S, Aoyagi S, Tanaka H (2013) Evaluation of prosthetic valve obstruction on electrocardiographically gated multidetector-row computed tomography–identification of subprosthetic pannus in the aortic position. Circ J 77(2):418–423

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Symersky P, Budde RP, de Mol BA, Prokop M (2009) Comparison of multidetector-row computed tomography to echocardiography and fluoroscopy for evaluation of patients with mechanical prosthetic valve obstruction. Am J Cardiol 104(8):1128–1134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. LaBounty TM, Agarwal PP, Chughtai A, Bach DS, Wizauer E, Kazerooni EA (2009) Evaluation of mechanical heart valve size and function with ECG-gated 64-MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193(5):W389–W396

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Taniguchi S, Hashizume K, Ariyoshi T et al (2012) Twelve years of experience with the ATS mechanical heart valve prostheses. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 60(9):561–568

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Aoyagi S, Fukunaga S, Suzuki S, Nishi Y, Oryoji A, Kosuga K (1996) Obstruction of mechanical valve prostheses: clinical diagnosis and surgical or nonsurgical treatment. Surg Today 26(6):400–406

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tsai IC, Lin YK, Chang Y et al (2009) Correctness of multi-detector-row computed tomography for diagnosing mechanical prosthetic heart valve disorders using operative findings as a gold standard. Eur Radiol 19(4):857–867

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Parnell A, Swanevelder J (2009) High transvalvular pressure gradients on intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography after aortic valve replacement: what does it mean? HSR Proc Intensive Care Cardiovasc Anesth 1(4):7–18

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Zoghbi WA, Chambers JB, Dumesnil JG et al (2009) Recommendations for evaluation of prosthetic valves with echocardiography and doppler ultrasound: a report From the American Society of Echocardiography’s Guidelines and Standards Committee and the Task Force on Prosthetic Valves, developed in conjunction with the American College of Cardiology Cardiovascular Imaging Committee, Cardiac Imaging Committee of the American Heart Association, the European Association of Echocardiography, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology, the Japanese Society of Echocardiography and the Canadian Society of Echocardiography, endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation, American Heart Association, European Association of Echocardiography, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology, the Japanese Society of Echocardiography, and Canadian Society of Echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 22(9):975-1014; quiz 1082-1014

  16. Deviri E, Sareli P, Wisenbaugh T, Cronje SL (1991) Obstruction of mechanical heart valve prostheses: clinical aspects and surgical management. J Am Coll Cardiol 17(3):646–650

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Aoyagi S, Nishimi M, Kawano H et al (2000) Obstruction of St Jude Medical valves in the aortic position: significance of a combination of cineradiography and echocardiography. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 120(1):142–147

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tayama E, Aoyagi S (2002) Asymptomatic prosthetic valve dysfunction: pannus? Artif Organs 26(5):399–401

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Cianciulli TF, Saccheri MC, Lax JA et al (2009) Intermittent acute aortic regurgitation of a mechanical bileaflet aortic valve prosthesis: diagnosis and clinical implications. Eur J Echocardiogr 10(3):446–449

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kuniyoshi Y, Koja K, Miyagi K et al (2003) Pannus formation in aortic valve prostheses in the late postoperative period. J Artif Organs 6(3):179–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Teshima H, Hayashida N, Yano H et al (2003) Obstruction of St Jude Medical valves in the aortic position: histology and immunohistochemistry of pannus. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 126(2):401–407

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Aoyagi S, Nishimi M, Tayama E et al (2002) Obstruction of St Jude medical valves in the aortic position: a consideration for pathogenic mechanism of prosthetic valve obstruction. Cardiovasc Surg 10(4):339–344

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bouchard D, Mazine A, Stevens LM et al (2014) Twenty-year experience with the CarboMedics mechanical valve prosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 97(3):816–823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Carrier M, Pellerin M, Basmadjian A et al (2006) Fifteen years of clinical and echocardiographic follow up with the carbomedics heart valve. J Heart Valve Dis 15(1):67–72 discussion 72

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rahimtoola SH (2010) Choice of prosthetic heart valve in adults an update. J Am Coll Cardiol 55(22):2413–2426

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Manji RA, Menkis AH, Ekser B, Cooper DK (2012) Porcine bioprosthetic heart valves: the next generation. Am Heart J 164(2):177–185

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kim L, Kim DK, Yang WI et al (2008) Overexpression of transforming growth factor-beta 1 in the valvular fibrosis of chronic rheumatic heart disease. J Korean Med Sci 23(1):41–48

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Chou HT, Chen CH, Tsai CH, Tsai FJ (2004) Association between transforming growth factor-beta1 gene C-509T and T869C polymorphisms and rheumatic heart disease. Am Heart J 148(1):181–186

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Chaudhry FA, Herrera C, DeFrino PF, Mehlman DJ, Zabalgoitia M (1991) Pathologic and angiographic correlations of transesophageal echocardiography in prosthetic heart valve dysfunction. Am Heart J 122(4 Pt 1):1057–1064

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Habets J, Mali WP, Budde RP (2012) Multidetector CT angiography in evaluation of prosthetic heart valve dysfunction. Radiographics 32(7):1893–1905

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Konen E, Goitein O, Feinberg MS et al (2008) The role of ECG-gated MDCT in the evaluation of aortic and mitral mechanical valves: initial experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191(1):26–31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the faculty research grant of Yonsei University College of Medicine (1-2014-0036).

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 120-752, Korea

    Young Joo Suh, Young Jin Kim, Yoo Jin Hong, Hye-Jeong Lee, Jin Hur & Byoung Wook Choi

  2. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Severance Cardiovascular Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

    Sak Lee & Byung-Chul Chang

Authors
  1. Young Joo Suh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Young Jin Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sak Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yoo Jin Hong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hye-Jeong Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jin Hur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Byoung Wook Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Byung-Chul Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Young Jin Kim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Suh, Y.J., Kim, Y.J., Lee, S. et al. Utility of cardiac computed tomography for evaluation of pannus in mechanical aortic valve. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 31, 1271–1280 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-015-0683-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-015-0683-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation