Predictor of left ventricular dysfunction after aortic valve replacement in mixed aortic valve disease

Association Between Aortic Valve Calcification and Severity of Concomitant Aortic Regurgitation in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) frequently have concomitant aortic regurgitation (AR), but the association between aortic valvular calcification (AVC) and the severity of AR remains unclear.Methods and Results: We retrospectively reviewed patients with severe AS who underwent transthoracic echocardiography and multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) within 1 month. The patients were divided into 3 groups according to the degree of concomitant AR. The association between AVC and the severity of concomitant AR was assessed in patients with severe AS. The study population consisted of 95 patients: 43 men and 52 women with a mean age of 82±7 years. Of the 95 patients with severe AS, 27 had no or trivial AR, 53 had mild AR, and 15 had moderate AR. The AVC score (AVCS) and AVC volume (AVCV) significantly increased as the severity of concomitant AR increased (P=0.014 for both), and similar findings were obtained for the AVCS and AVCV indexes (P=0.004 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

The severity of AR correlated with AVCS and AVCV measured by MDCT in patients with severe AS. AVC may cause concomitant AR, leading to worsening of disease condition.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Mixed Aortic Valve Disease: A Multicenter Study

Mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD), defined by the concurrent presence of aortic stenosis (AS) and insufficiency is frequently seen in patients who have undergone transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, studies comparing the outcomes of TAVI in MAVD versus isolated AS have demonstrated conflicting results. Therefore, we aim to assess the outcomes of TAVI in patients with MAVD in comparison with those with isolated severe AS. Patients who underwent native valve TAVI for severe AS at 3 tertiary care academic centers between January 2012 and December 2020 were included and categorized into 3 groups based on concomitant aortic insufficiency (AI) as follows: group 1, no AI; group 2, mild AI; and group 3, moderate to severe AI. Outcomes of interest included all-cause mortality and all-cause readmission rates at 30 days and 1 year. Other outcomes include bleeding, stroke, vascular complications, and the incidence of paravalvular leak at 30 days after the procedure. Of the 1,588 patients who underwent TAVI during the study period, 775 patients (49%) had isolated AS, 606 (38%) had mild AI, and 207 (13%) had moderate to severe AI. Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk scores were significantly different among the 3 groups (5% in group 1, 5.5% in group 2, and 6% in group 3, p = 0.003). Balloon-expandable valves were used in about 2/3 of the population. No statistically significant differences in 30-day or 1-year all-cause mortality and all-cause readmission rates were noted among the 3 groups. Post-TAVI paravalvular leak at follow-up was significantly lower in group 1 (2.3%) and group 2 (2%) compared with group 3 (5.6%) (p = 0.01). In summary, TAVI in MAVD is associated with comparable outcomes at 1 year compared with patients with isolated severe AS.

Prognostic utility of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide ratio in mixed aortic valve disease

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the incremental prognostic value of N-terminal-pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (Nt-proBNP) for risk stratification in mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) patients.

METHODS

We included 556 (73±12 years, 37% women) consecutive patients with at least a moderate aortic stenosis (AS) or aortic regurgitation (AR) lesion with a concomitant AS or AR of any severity in whom Nt-proBNP was measured and expressed as its ratio (measured Nt-proBNP divided by the upper limit of normal Nt-proBNP for age and sex). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Baseline median Nt-proBNP ratio was 3.8 (IQR: 1.5-11.3), and the median follow-up was 5.6 years (4.8-6.1). Early aortic valve replacement (AVR) was performed within 3 months in 423 (76%) patients, while 133 (24%) remained initially under medical treatment. In comprehensive multivariable analyses, Nt-proBNP ratio was significantly associated with excess mortality (continuous variable: HR (95% CI): 1.24 (1.04 to 1.47), p=0.02; Nt-proBNP ratio ≥3: 2.41 (1.33 to 4.39), p=0.004). The independent prognostic value was also observed in patients with severe or non-severe AS/AR, and those treated by early-AVR (all p<0.04). Nt-proBNP ratio as continuous and dichotomic (≥3) variables showed incremental prognostic value (all net reclassification index >0.42, all p≤0.008). After early-AVR, Nt-proBNP ratio ≥3 was associated with higher 30-day mortality (9 (4%) vs 1 (0.5%), p=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In this series of MAVD patients, Nt-proBNP ratio was a powerful predictor of early and long-term mortality, even in patients with both non-severe AS/AR. Moreover, early-AVR may be an option for patients with Nt-proBNP ratio ≥3. Further randomised studies are needed to validate this last point.

Left ventricular adaptation to aortic regurgitation in adults with repaired coarctation of aorta

BACKGROUND

Aortic regurgitation (AR) can develop in adults with repaired coarctation of aorta (COA), but there are limited data about left ventricular (LV) remodeling and clinical outcomes in this population. The purpose of the study was to compare LV remodeling (LV mass index [LVMI], LV ejection fraction [LVEF], and septal E/e') and onset of symptoms before aortic valve replacement, and LV reverse remodeling (%-change in LVMI, LVEF and E/e') after aortic valve replacement in patients with versus without repaired COA presenting with AR.

METHODS

Asymptomatic adults with repaired COA presenting with moderate/severe AR (AR-COA group) were matched 1:2 to asymptomatic adults without COA and similar severity of AR (control group).

RESULTS

Although both groups (AR-COA n = 52, and control n = 104) had similar age, sex, body mass index, aortic valve gradient, and AR severity, the AR-COA group had higher LVMI (124 ± 28 versus 102 ± 25 g/m², p < 0.001) and E/e' (12.3 ± 2.3 versus 9.5 ± 2.1, p = 0.02) but similar LVEF (63 ± 9% versus 67 ± 10%, p = 0.4). COA diagnosis (adjusted HR 1.95, 95%CI 1.49-2.37, p < 0.001), older age, E/e', and LV hypertrophy were associated with onset of symptoms. Of 89 patients (AR-COA n = 41, and control n = 48) with echocardiographic data at 1-year post- aortic valve replacement, the AR-COA group had less regression of LVMI (-8% [95%CI -5 to -11] versus -17% [95%CI -15 to -21], p < 0.001) and E/e' (-5% [95% CI -3 to -7] versus -16% [95% CI -13 to -19], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with COA and AR had a more aggressive clinical course, and perhaps may require a different threshold for surgical intervention.

Mixed aortic stenosis and regurgitation: a clinical conundrum

Mixed aortic stenosis (AS) and aortic regurgitation (AR) is the most frequent concomitant valve disease worldwide and represents a heterogeneous population ranging from mild AS with severe AR to mild AR with severe AS. About 6.8% of patients with at least moderate AS will also have moderate or greater AR, and 17.9% of patients with at least moderate AR will suffer from moderate or greater AS. Interest in mixed AS/AR has increased, with studies demonstrating that patients with moderate mixed AS/AR have similar outcomes to those with isolated severe AS. The diagnosis and quantification of mixed AS/AR severity are predominantly echocardiography-based, but the combined lesions lead to significant limitations in the assessment. Aortic valve peak velocity is the best parameter to evaluate the combined haemodynamic impact of both lesions, with a peak velocity greater than 4.0 m/s suggesting severe mixed AS/AR. Moreover, symptoms, increased left ventricular wall thickness and filling pressures, and abnormal left ventricular global longitudinal strain likely identify high-risk patients who may benefit from closer follow-up. Although guidelines recommend interventions based on the predominant lesion, some patients could potentially benefit from earlier intervention. Once a patient is deemed to require intervention, for patients receiving transcatheter valves, the presence of mixed AS/AR could confer benefit to those at high risk of paravalvular leak. Overall, the current approach of managing patients based on the dominant lesion might be too reductionist and a more holistic approach including biomarkers and multimodality imaging cardiac remodelling and inflammation data might be more appropriate.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in mixed aortic valve disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Utilization of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has expanded from high-risk patients to intermediate- and select low-risk candidates with severe aortic stenosis (AS). TAVR is currently not indicated for patients with aortic insufficiency, and its outcomes in mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) are unclear.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Medline, CINHAL, and Cochrane databases was performed to identify studies comparing TAVR outcomes in patients with AS vs. MAVD. Primary outcomes included 30-day and late all-cause mortality, and paravalvular regurgitation (PVR). Secondary outcomes were major bleeding, vascular complications, device implantation success, permanent pacemaker, and stroke. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Der Simonian-Laird random-effects model.

RESULTS

Six observational studies with 58 879 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in 30-day all-cause mortality [OR 1.03 (95% CI 0.92-1.15); P = 0.63], however, MAVD group had higher odds of moderate-to-severe PVR [1.81 (1.41-2.31); P < 0.01]. MAVD patients had lower odds of device implantation success [0.60 (0.40-0.91); P = 0.02] while other secondary outcomes were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR in MAVD is associated with increased odds of paravalvular regurgitation and lower odds of device implantation success when compared to severe aortic stenosis.

When Aortic Stenosis Is Not Alone: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Diagnosis and Management in Mixed and Combined Valvular Disease

Aortic stenosis (AS) may present frequently combined with other valvular diseases or mixed with aortic regurgitation, with peculiar physio-pathological and clinical implications. The hemodynamic interactions between AS in mixed or combined valve disease depend on the specific combination of valve lesions and may result in diagnostic pitfalls at echocardiography; other imaging modalities may be helpful. Indeed, diagnosis is challenging because several echocardiographic methods commonly used to assess stenosis or regurgitation have been validated only in patients with the single-valve disease. Moreover, in the developed world, patients with multiple valve diseases tend to be older and more fragile over time; also, when more than one valvular lesion needs to address the surgical risk rises together with the long-term risk of morbidity and mortality associated with multiple valve prostheses, and the likelihood and risk of reoperation. Therefore, when AS presents mixed or combined valve disease, the heart valve team must integrate various parameters into the diagnosis and management strategy, including suitability for single or multiple transcatheter valve procedures. This review aims to summarize the most critical pathophysiological mechanisms underlying AS when associated with mitral regurgitation, mitral stenosis, aortic regurgitation, and tricuspid regurgitation. We will focus on echocardiography, clinical implications, and the most important treatment strategies.

Blunted beta-adrenoceptor-mediated inotropy in valvular cardiomyopathy: another piece of the puzzle in human aortic valve disease

OBJECTIVES

Heart failure induced by valvular cardiomyopathy occurs in a substantial proportion of patients undergoing heart valve surgery. We aimed (i) to quantify beta-adrenoceptor (beta-AR) function by measuring the inotropic effect of isoprenaline in left ventricular (LV) tissue and (ii) to correlate beta-AR-mediated inotropy with clinical markers of heart failure.

METHODS

A total of 179 LV myocardial samples were obtained from 104 consecutive patients who underwent aortic valve (AV) surgery between 2017 and 2019. Beta-ARs were stimulated by increasing the concentrations of isoprenaline, followed by a single high concentration of forskolin and calcium. Beta-AR sensitivity was estimated as the concentration to achieve half maximum effects (EC50). Maximum effect size was calculated as the relative beta-AR-mediated inotropic response compared to the force in the presence of high calcium [FISO/Ca (%)]. In vitro data were correlated with the clinical indicators of LV disease.

RESULTS

FISO/Ca was independent of age and sex and amounted to 79.6 ± 20.5%. In a multivariate regression model, we found a significant inverse association between FISO/Ca and preoperative left ventricular end-diastolic diameter increase per 10 mm (OR -9.24, 95% CI -16.66 to -1.82; P = 0.015). Furthermore, patients with end-stage heart failure showed a strong tendency towards more severe reduction of max beta-AR response, as indicated by reduced FISO/Ca in a multivariate model (OR -29.60, 95% CI -61.92 to 2.72; P = 0.055).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates that in vitro myocardial contractility testing can quantify beta-AR dysfunction in patients with AV disease. We found a significant association between reduced beta-AR sensitivity and increased LV diameter, which may indicate a role of beta-AR dysfunction in the development of heart failure in patients with AV disease.

Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for patients with severe aortic stenosis and concomitant aortic insufficiency: Insights from the TVT Registry

AIMS

Data regarding outcomes for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) with concomitant aortic insufficiency (AI), undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are limited. This study aimed to analyze the prevalence of severe AS with concomitant AI among patients undergoing TAVR and outcomes of TAVR in this patient group.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using data from the STS/ACC-TVT Registry, we identified patients with severe AS with or without concomitant AI who underwent TAVR between 2011 and 2016. Patients were categorized based on the severity of pre-procedural AI. Multivariable proportional hazards regression models were used to examine all-cause mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization at 1-year. Among 54,535 patients undergoing TAVR, 42,568 (78.1%) had severe AS with concomitant AI. Device success was lower in patients with severe AS with concomitant AI as compared with isolated AS. The presence of baseline AI was associated with lower 1 year mortality (HR 0.94 per 1 grade increase in AI severity; 95% CI, 0.91-0.98, P < .001) and HF hospitalization (HR 0.87 per 1 grade increase in AI severity; 95% CI, 0.84-0.91, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Severe AS with concomitant AI is common among patients undergoing TAVR, and is associated with lower 1 year mortality and HF hospitalization. Future studies are warranted to better understand the mechanisms underlying this benefit.

SHORT ABSTRACT

In this nationally representative analysis from the United States, 78.1% of patients undergoing TAVR had severe AS with concomitant AI. Device success was lower in patients with severe AS with concomitant AI as compared with isolated AS. The presence of baseline AI was associated with lower 1 year mortality (HR 0.94 per 1 grade increase in AI severity; 95% CI, 0.91-0.98, P < .001) and HF hospitalization (HR 0.87 per 1 grade increase in AI severity; 95% CI, 0.84-0.91, P < .001).

Moderate Aortic Stenosis and Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: Can Imaging Guide Us to Therapy?

Clinical management of patients with only moderate aortic stenosis (AS) but symptoms of heart failure with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) is challenging. Current guidelines recommend clinical surveillance with multimodality imaging; aortic valve replacement (AVR) is deferred until the stenosis becomes severe. Given the known benefits of afterload reduction in management of patients with HFrEF, it has been hypothesized that AVR may be beneficial in patients with only moderate AS who present with HFrEF. In this article, we first review the current approach for management of patients with moderate AS and HFrEF based on close clinical and imaging surveillance with AVR delayed until AS is severe. We then discuss the case for transcatheter AVR (TAVR) earlier in the disease course, when AS is moderate, based on stress echocardiographic data. We conclude with a detailed summary of the TAVR UNLOAD (Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement to UNload the Left Ventricle in Patients With ADvanced Heart Failure) trial, in which patients with moderate AS and HFrEF are randomized to guideline-directed heart failure therapy alone versus guideline-directed heart failure therapy plus TAVR.

Outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement for mixed aortic valve disease

Background

Mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) is associated with a poorer natural history compared with isolated lesions. However, clinical and echocardiographic outcomes for aortic valve replacement (AVR) in mixed disease are less well understood.

Methods

Retrospective review of AVRs (n=1,011) from 2000-2016. Isolated AVR, AVR + coronary bypass, and AVR + limited ascending aortic replacement were included. Predominant aortic stenosis (AS) group was stratified into group 1 (n=660) with concomitant mild or less aortic insufficiency (AI), and group 2 (n=197) with accompanying moderate or greater AI. Predominant AI group was stratified using the same schema for concomitant AS into groups 3 (n=143) and 4 (n=53). Median follow-up was 3.1 and 4.4 years respectively for AS and AI groups.

Results

For the predominant AS group (n=857) preoperatively, group 2 had a larger preoperative left ventricular end diastolic diameter (LVESD) (51.0±8.4 vs. 48.6±7.2, P=0.02) and lower preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (57.6% vs. 60.2%, P=0.043). No differences in left ventricular (LV) dimensions, LV or right ventricular (RV) function was evident at follow up (P>0.05). After propensity matching for age, operation, and comorbidities, there was no difference in survival (P=0.19). After propensity matching for the predominant AI group (n=196), survival was lower for group 4 compared to 3 (P=0.02). There were no differences in LV dimensions, LV or RV function preoperatively or on follow-up (P>0.05).

Conclusions

Predominant AS associated with higher AI grades had larger LV dimensions and worse LV function preoperatively. These differences resolve after AVR with equivalent survival. However, predominant AI with more severe AS had reduced survival despite AVR.