TCT-225 Artificial Intelligence-Based Versus 3mensio Software-Based Preprocedural Planning for TAVR: A Comparative Analysis of Clinical Outcomes

Document Type

Abstract

Publication Date

10-28-2025

Abstract

Background: 3mensio is a widely adopted software for TAVR preprocedural planning. Recently, AI-driven automated platforms have emerged, offering faster, operator-independent planning. This study aims to compare clinical outcomes between TAVR procedures planned with AI-based software and those planned with 3mensio. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 980 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR from 2021–2024. Patients were stratified into two groups: AI planning (n = 420) and 3mensio-based planning (n = 560). Baseline characteristics, procedural metrics, and clinical outcomes—including device success, paravalvular leak (PVL), new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI), and 30-day mortality—were compared. Results: Device success was significantly higher in the AI group compared to 3mensio (96.2% vs. 92.5%, p = 0.03). Moderate or severe PVL occurred in 2.1% of AI-planned cases vs. 5.6% in the 3mensio group (p = 0.01). PPI rate was lower in the AI group (8.5% vs. 11.3%, p = 0.04). There was no significant difference in 30-day all-cause mortality (2.3% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.52). Planning time was significantly reduced in the AI group (12 ± 3 min vs. 34 ± 5 min, p < 0.001). Conclusion: AI-based TAVR planning was associated with improved procedural outcomes, reduced PVL and PPI, and faster planning time compared to 3mensio. These findings support broader integration of AI into structural heart planning workflows. Categories: STRUCTURAL: Artificial Intelligence: Structural

Publication Title

Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Volume

86

Issue

17 Supplement

First Page

B99

Last Page

B99

Comments

Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics held 2025-10-25 to 2025-10-28 in San Francisco, CA

This document is currently not available here.

Open Access

Share

COinS