Orifice areas of balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves: a three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography study

Echocardiographic parameters associated with less reverse left ventricular remodeling after transcatheter aortic valve implant in subjects with prosthesis patient mismatch

BACKGROUND

Transaortic valve implant (TAVI) is the treatment of choice for severe aortic stenosis (AS). Some patients develop prosthesis patient mismatch (PPM) after TAVI. It is challenging to determine which patients are at risk for clinical deterioration.

METHODS

We retrospectively measured echocardiographic parameters of left ventricular (LV) morphology and function, prosthetic aortic valve effective orifice area (iEOA) and hemodynamics in 313 patients before and 1 year after TAVI. Our objective was to compare the change in echocardiographic parameters associated with left ventricular reverse modeling in subjects with and without PPM. Our secondary objective was to evaluate echo parameters associated with PPM and the relationship to patient functional status and survival post-TAVI.

RESULTS

We found that 82 (26.2%) of subjects had moderate and 37 (11.8%) had severe PPM post-TAVI. There was less relative improvement in LVEF with PPM (1.9 ± 21.3% vs. 8.2 + 30.1%, p = .045). LV GLS also exhibited less relative improvement in those with PPM (13.4 + 34.1% vs. 30.9 + 73.3%, p = .012). NYHA functional class improved in 84.3% of subjects by one grade or more. Echocardiographic markers of PPM were worse in those without improvement in NYHA class (mean AT/ET was .29 vs. .27, p = .05; DVI was .46 vs. .51, p = .021; and iEOA was .8 cm/m2 vs. .9 cm/m2 , p = .025). There was no association with PPM and survival.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no improvement in LVEF and less improvement in LV GLS in those with PPM post-TAVI. Echocardiographic markers of PPM were present in those with lack of improvement in NYHA functional class.

Association between coronary flow and aortic stenosis during transcatheter aortic valve implantation

AIMS

In patients with aortic stenosis (AS), the coronary flow reserve decreases even in the absence of epicardial coronary artery stenosis. Systolic coronary flow reversal (SFR) reflecting reduced coronary microcirculation, often seen in patients with severe AS, has a potential negative impact on the pathogenesis of cardiac dysfunction. However, there are limited data on the relationship between the severity of AS and SFR, as well as on the benefits of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between the severity of AS and efficacy of TAVI in improving SFR.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive patients with AS who had undergone TAVI using transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) from November 2020 to February 2022 were prospectively enrolled. Coronary flow in the left anterior descending artery as well as the aortic valve peak velocities, and the mean aortic valve pressure gradients (AVPGs), indicating the severity of AS, were measured using intraprocedural TEE before and after TAVI. The following parameters were measured as coronary flow: systolic and diastolic peak velocity (cm/s) and systolic and diastolic velocity-time integral (VTI) (cm). SFR was defined as the presence of a reversal coronary flow component in systole. The enrolled patients were classified into two groups according to the presence or absence of SFR before TAVI. A total of 25 patients were included: 13 had SFR and 12 who had no SFR, before TAVI. Patients with SFR had significantly higher aortic valve peak velocities (451.1 ± 45.9 vs. 372.1 ± 52.1 cm/s; P < 0.001) and mean AVPGs (49.2 ± 14.5 vs. 30.3 ± 11.6 mmHg; P = 0.002) than those without. The optimal binary cut-off aortic valve peak velocity values and the mean AVPG associated with the presence of SFR before TAVI were >410.0 cm/s (specificity, 75.0%; sensitivity, 92.3%) and >37.4 mmHg (specificity, 83.3%; sensitivity, 92.3%), respectively. After TAVI, SFR immediately disappeared in 11 of 13 patients with SFR (84.6%). Overall, the systolic coronary VTI significantly increased after TAVI (2.0 ± 4.7 vs. 6.4 ± 3.2 cm, P < 0.001), and this increase was greater in patients with SFR than in those without SFR before TAVI (interaction P = 0.035).

CONCLUSIONS

SFR was found to be associated with the severity of AS and with a greater increase in systolic coronary flow immediately after TAVI.