Table 2.

Clinical impact in preprocedural sizing.

Patient no.	CT (mm)	Freixa	Decision SoC	Confidence SoC	Decision FEops	Confidence FEops	Implanted
n = 7 (46.7%)			Similar decisions SoC and FEops correlating with implanted device
1	16 × 17	22	20	8	20	9	20
2	17 × 22	25	22	7	22	9	22
8	13 × 19	20	20	8	20	8	20
10	27 × 37	34	34	4	34	7	34
11	19 × 37	34	31	6	31	8	31
13	21 × 36	34	34	6	34	8	34
14	19 × 22	25	25	6	25	8	25
Average				6.4 ± 1.4		8.1 ± 0.7	p=0.003
n = 4 (26.7%)			Different decisions SoC and FEops. FEops correlated with implanted device
3	16 × 18	22	20	8	22	8	22
5	19 × 25	28	25	7	22	7	22
6	14 × 21	22	22	7	20	7	20
7	19 × 26	28	28	7	25	7	25
Average				7.3 ± 0.5		7.3 ± 0.5	p=NS
n = 2 (13.3%)			Similar decisions SoC and FEops, not correlating with implanted device
4	21 × 31	31	31	7	31	8	28
12	22 × 23	28	25	8	25	6	28
Average				7.5		7	p=NS
n = 1 (6.7%)			Different decisions SoC and FEops, none correlating with implanted device
15	14 × 19	22	22	8	20	7	18
n = 1 (6.7%)			Similar decisions SoC and FEops, but no implanted device
9	22 × 31	31	31	7	31	7	NA

CT: computed tomography measurement of landing zone, NS: nonsignificant, SoC: standard of care, and Freixa: sizing based on the sizing table from Freixa et al. [6].