Prognosis of Severe Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis by Stroke Volume Index and Transvalvular Flow Rate

Impact of stroke volume assessment by three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography on the classification of low-gradient aortic stenosis

BACKGROUND

Accurate assessment of flow status is crucial in low-gradient aortic stenosis (AS). However, the clinical implication of three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (3DTEE) on flow status evaluation remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the assessment of flow status using 3D TEE in low-gradient AS patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients diagnosed with low-gradient AS and preserved ejection fraction at our institution between 2019 and 2022. Patients were categorized into low-flow/low-gradient (LF-LG) AS or normal-flow/low-gradient (NF-LG) AS based on two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography (2DTTE). We compared the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) geometry between the two groups and reclassified them using stroke volume index (SVi) obtained by 3DTEE.

RESULTS

Among 173 patients (105 with LF-LG AS and 68 with NF-LG AS), 54 propensity-matched pairs of patients were analyzed. 3DTEE-derived ellipticity index of LVOT was significantly higher in LF-LG AS patients compared to NF-LG AS patients (p = 0.012). We assessed the discordance in flow status classification between SVi2DTTE and SVi3DTEE in both groups using a cutoff value of 35 ml/m2. The LF-LG AS group exhibited a significantly higher discordance rate compared to the NF-LG AS group, with rates of 50% and 2%, respectively. The optimal cutoff values of SVi3DTEE for identifying low flow status, based on 2DTTE-derived cutoff values, were determined to be 43 ml/m2.

CONCLUSIONS

LVOT ellipticity in low-gradient AS patients varies depending on flow status, and this difference contributes to discrepancies between SVi3DTEE and SVi2DTTE, particularly in LF-LG AS patients. Utilizing SVi3DTEE is valuable for accurately assessing flow status.

Stroke volume index (SVI) predicts all-cause mortality following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular systolic dysfunction in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) may result in low transvalvular gradients and underestimation of AS severity. A low-flow state may occur with reduced LVEF. Little is known about the implications of low compared to normal flow in patients with reduced LVEF undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

OBJECTIVES

We compared survival rates with degree of flow across stenosed aortic valves and left ventricular dysfunction. We hypothesized that the stroke volume index (SVI) offers essential information regarding survival following TAVR.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients with LVEF <50 % undergoing TAVR at the Gates Vascular Institute in Buffalo, New York, from 2012 to 2017. We performed Receiver Operator Characteristics to examine the value of SVI in predicting the postoperative outcome of patients. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used to investigate the effect of a low-flow state on five-year survival in patients with systolic dysfunction undergoing TAVR.

RESULTS

Five-year survival following TAVR was decreased in patients with low-flow AS (SVI <35 mL/m2) compared to patients with normal flow. Seventy-four percent (n = 50) of patients with low-flow compared to 43 % (n = 22) of patients with normal flow were deceased five years post-TAVR (p ≤0.001). ROC curve indicated SVI to be a clinical predictor of five year survival (AUC 0.732, 95 % CI: 0.641-0.823, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with systolic dysfunction and low transvalvular flow AS had increased mortality five years following TAVR. These findings highlight a better prognosis in patients with normal flow and LV systolic dysfunction.

CONDENSED ABSTRACT

Low-flow aortic stenosis can occur with reduced left ventricular function. We compared survival rates of patients with known reduced left ventricular function in low-flow and normal flow aortic stenosis. This retrospective single-center study examined mortality rates following transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The mean gradient was not a predictor of mortality. This study shows patients with low-flow aortic stenosis have decreased five-year survival following valve replacement.

Prognostic value of flow-status in severe aortic stenosis patients undergoing percutaneous intervention

PURPOSE

Low-flow status is a mortality predictor in severe aortic stenosis (SAS) patients, including after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) treatment. However, the best parameter to assess flow is unknown. Recent studies suggest that transaortic flow rate (FR) is superior to currently used stroke volume index (SVi) in defining low-flow states. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of FR and SVi in patients undergoing TAVI.

METHODS

A single-centre retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients treated with TAVI for SAS between 2011 and 2019 was conducted. Low-FR was defined as < 200 mL/s and low-SVi as < 35 mL/m2. Primary endpoint was all-cause five-year mortality, analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models. Secondary endpoint was variation of NYHA functional class six months after procedure. Patients were further stratified according to ejection fraction (EF < 50%).

RESULTS

Of 489 cases, 59.5% were low-FR, and 43.1% low-SVi. Low-flow patients had superior surgical risk, worse renal function, and had a higher prevalence of coronary artery disease. Low-FR was associated with mortality (hazard ratio 1.36, p = 0.041), but not after adjustment to EuroSCORE II. Normal-SVi was not associated with survival, despite a significative p-trend for its continuous value. No associations were found for flow-status and NYHA recovery. When stratifying according to preserved and reduced EF, both FR and SVi did not predict all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSION

In patients with SAS undergoing TAVI, a low-FR state was associated with higher mortality, as well as SVi, but not at a 35 mL/m2 cut off.

Prognostic value of transvalvular flow rate in patients with low-gradient severe aortic stenosis: A dobutamine stress echocardiography study

BACKGROUNDS

There are limited data on the clinical relevance of transvalvular flow rate (Qmean ) at rest (Qrest) and at peak stress (Qstress ) during dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) in patients with low-gradient severe aortic stenosis (LG-SAS).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of patients with LG-SAS who underwent DSE. LG-SAS was defined as an aortic valve (AV) area index of < .6 cm2 /m2 and a mean AV pressure gradient (AVPG) of < 40 mm Hg. The primary endpoint included all-cause death and heart failure hospitalization.

RESULTS

Of 100 patients (mean age 79.5 ± 7.3 years; men, 45.0%; resting left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] 52.1% ± 15.9%; resting stroke volume index 35.8 ± 7.7 mL/m2 ; Qrest 171.8 ± 34.9 mL/s), the primary endpoint occurred in 51 patients during a median follow-up of 2.84 (interquartile range 1.01-5.21) years. When the study patients were divided into three subgroups based on Qrest and Qstress , the multivariate analysis showed that Qrest < 200 mL/s and Qstress ≥200 mL/s (hazard ratio 3.844; 95% confidence interval 1.143-12.930; p = .030), as well as Qrest and Qstress < 200 mL/s (hazard ratio 9.444; 95% confidence interval 2.420-36.850; p = .001), were significantly associated with unfavorable outcomes with Qrest and Qstress ≥200 mL/s as a reference after adjusting for resting LVEF, resting mean AVPG, chronic kidney disease, New York Heart Association functional class III/IV, and AV replacement.

CONCLUSIONS

Flow conditions based on the combination of Qrest and Qstress are helpful for risk stratification in LG-SAS patients.

Low Transvalvular Flow Rate in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) Is a Predictor of Mortality: The TFR-TAVI Study

BACKGROUND

Transvalvular flow rate (TFR) represents a better reflection of transvalvular flow than the stroke volume index (SVi), and has recently emerged as a useful prognostic tool in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement. There is a paucity of data investigating the role of TFR and its relationship with other clinical or echocardiographic factors in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

METHOD

This was a retrospective single-centre study of 629 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI between March 2009 and September 2020. Pre-TAVI low TFR was defined as <200 c/s. The primary study end point was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Low TFR was observed in 41.8% (263/629) of included patients and was associated with increasing age, low body surface area, hypertension, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, left ventricular (LV) dysfunction, and significant mitral regurgitation. LV function status and severity of aortic valve disease were independent predictors of low TFR. Low TFR was significantly associated with long-term all-cause mortality even after adjustment for other risk factors (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.03; p=0.038). When data were stratified according to SVi, low TFR was an independent predictor of long-term all-cause mortality in patients with normal SVi (aHR 1.98; 95% CI 1.06-3.69; p=0.032) but not in patients with low SVi (HR 1.23; 95% CI 0.71-2.11; p=0.46; p=0.016 for interaction).

CONCLUSIONS

Low TFR is common in patients undergoing TAVI and is an independent predictor of all-cause mortality, particularly in patients with normal SVi.

The Mortality Burden of Untreated Aortic Stenosis

BACKGROUND

The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines recommend the assessment and grading of severity of aortic stenosis (AS) as mild, moderate, or severe, per echocardiogram, and recommend aortic valve replacement (AVR) when the AS is severe.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to describe mortality rates across the entire spectrum of untreated AS from a contemporary, large, real-world database.

METHODS

We analyzed a deidentified real-world data set including 1,669,536 echocardiographic reports (1,085,850 patients) from 24 U.S. hospitals (egnite Database, egnite). Patients >18 years of age were classified by diagnosed AS severity. Untreated mortality and treatment rates were examined with Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates, with results compared using the log-rank test. Multivariate hazards analysis was performed to assess associations with all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Among 595,120 patients with available AS severity assessment, the KM-estimated 4-year unadjusted, untreated, all-cause mortality associated with AS diagnosis of none, mild, mild-to-moderate, moderate, moderate-to-severe, or severe was 13.5% (95% CI: 13.3%-13.7%), 25.0% (95% CI: 23.8%-26.1%), 29.7% (95% CI: 26.8%-32.5%), 33.5% (95% CI: 31.0%-35.8%), 45.7% (95% CI: 37.4%-52.8%), and 44.9% (95% CI: 39.9%-49.6%), respectively. Results were similar when adjusted for informative censoring caused by treatment. KM-estimated 4-year observed treatment rates were 0.2% (95% CI: 0.2%-0.2%), 1.0% (95% CI: 0.7%-1.3%), 4.2% (95% CI: 2.0%-6.3%), 11.4% (95% CI: 9.5%-13.3%), 36.7% (95% CI: 31.8%-41.2%), and 60.7% (95% CI: 58.0%-63.3%), respectively. After adjustment, all degrees of AS severity were associated with increased mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with AS have high mortality risk across all levels of untreated AS severity. Aortic valve replacement rates remain low for patients with severe AS, suggesting that more research is needed to understand barriers to diagnosis and appropriate approach and timing for aortic valve replacement.

Aortic Valvular Stenosis and Heart Failure: Advances in Diagnostic, Management, and Intervention

Up to 30% of patients with aortic stenosis (AS) present with heart failure (HF) symptoms with either reduced or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. Many of these patients present with a low-flow state, reduced aortic-valve-area (≤1.0 cm²) with low aortic-mean-gradient and aortic-peak-velocity (<40 mm Hg and <4.0 m/s). Thus, determination of true severity is essential for correct management, and multi-imaging evaluation must be performed. Medical treatment of HF is imperative and should be optimized concurrently with the determination of AS-severity. Finally, AS should be treated according to guidelines, keeping in mind that HF and low-flow increase interventions risks.

Grading of Aortic Stenosis: Is it More Complicated in Women?

Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular heart disease and the main indication for valvular replacement in older women. Correct AS grading is mandatory for an adequate selection of patients for both surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Women and men have different AS severity grades at the same level of aortic valve calcification. Moreover, besides having smaller cardiac volumes, left ventricular outflow tract and aortic size, women have a specific pattern of left ventricular structural and functional remodelling in response to the AS-related chronic pressure overload. Here, the sex-specific cardiac changes in AS that make AS grading more challenging in women, with consequences for the management and outcome of this group of patients, are reviewed.

Prevalence and Prognostic Implications of Discordant Grading and Flow-Gradient Patterns in Moderate Aortic Stenosis

BACKGROUND

The prognostic implications of discordant grading in severe aortic stenosis (AS) are well known. However, the prevalence of different flow-gradient patterns and their prognostic implications in moderate AS are unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to investigate the occurrence and prognostic implications of different flow-gradient patterns in patients with moderate AS.

METHODS

Patients with moderate AS (aortic valve area >1.0 and ≤1.5 cm²) were identified and divided in 4 groups based on transvalvular mean gradient (MG), stroke volume index (SVi), and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF): concordant moderate AS (MG ≥20 mm Hg) and discordant moderate AS including 3 subgroups: normal-flow, low-gradient moderate AS (MG <20 mm Hg, SVi ≥35 mL/m², and LVEF ≥50%); "paradoxical" low-flow, low-gradient moderate AS (MG <20 mm Hg, SVi <35 mL/m², and LVEF ≥50%) and "classical" low-flow, low-gradient moderate AS (MG <20 mm Hg and LVEF <50%). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Of 1,974 patients (age 73 ± 10 years, 51% men) with moderate AS, 788 (40%) had discordant grading, and these patients showed significantly higher mortality rates than patients with concordant moderate AS (P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, "paradoxical" low-flow, low-gradient (HR: 1.458; 95% CI: 1.072-1.983; P = 0.014) and "classical" low-flow, low-gradient (HR: 1.710; 95% CI: 1.270-2.303; P < 0.001) patterns but not the normal-flow, low-gradient moderate AS pattern were independently associated with all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Discordant grading is frequently (40%) observed in patients with moderate AS. Low-flow, low-gradient patterns account for an important proportion of the discordant cases and are associated with increased mortality. These findings underline the need for better phenotyping patients with discordant moderate AS.

Severe aortic stenosis echocardiographic thresholds revisited

BACKGROUND

In view of inconsistencies in threshold values of severe aortic stenosis (AS) hemodynamic indices, it is unclear what is the relative contribution of each variable in a binary classification of AS based on aortic valve replacement (AVR) indication. We aimed to assess relative discriminative value and optimal threshold of each constituent hemodynamic parameter for this classification and confirm additional prognostic value.

METHODS

Echocardiography studies of 168 patients with ≥ moderate AS were included. AS types were dichotomized into Group-A, comprising moderate and Normal-Flow Low-Gradient (NFLG), and Group-B, comprising High-Gradient(HG), Low Ejection Fraction Low-Flow Low-Gradient(Low EF-LFLG), and Paradoxical Low-Flow Low-Gradient(PLFLG) AS. Aortic valve area (AVA), Doppler velocity index (DVI), peak aortic velocity, mean gradient, stroke volume index and transaortic flow rate(TFR) were assessed for A/B Group discrimination value and optimal thresholds were determined. Dichotomized values were assessed for predictive value for AVR or death.

RESULTS

C-statistic values for binary AS classification was .74-.9 for the tested variables. AVA and DVI featured the highest score, and SVI the lowest one. AVA≤.81 cm² and DVI≤.249 had 87.6% and 86% respective sensitivity for Group B patients, and a similar specificity of 80.9%. During a mean follow-up of 9.1±10.1 months, each of the tested dichotomized variables except for SVI predicted AVR or death on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

An AVA value ≤.81 cm² or a DVI ≤ .249 threshold carry the highest discriminative value for severe AS in patients with aortic stenosis, translating into an independent prognostic value, and can be helpful in making clinical decisions.

Moderate gradient severe aortic stenosis: diagnosis, prognosis and therapy

Aortic stenosis (AS) is defined as severe in the presence of: mean gradient ≥40 mmHg, peak aortic velocity ≥4 m/s, and aortic valve area (AVA) ≤1 cm² (or an indexed AVA ≤0.6 cm²/m²). However, up to 40% of patients have a discrepancy between gradient and AVA, i.e. AVA ≤1 cm² (indicating severe AS) and a moderate gradient: >20 and <40 mmHg (typical of moderate stenosis). This condition is called ‘low-gradient AS’ and includes very heterogeneous clinical entities, with different pathophysiological mechanisms. The diagnostic tools needed to discriminate the different low-gradient AS phenotypes include colour-Doppler echocardiography, dobutamine stress echocardiography, computed tomography scan for the definition of the calcium score, and recently magnetic resonance imaging. The prognostic impact of low-gradient AS is heterogeneous. Classical low-flow low-gradient AS [reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)] has the worst prognosis, followed by paradoxical low-flow low-gradient AS (preserved LVEF). Conversely, normal-flow low-gradient AS is associated with a better prognosis. The indications of the guidelines recommend surgical or percutaneous treatment, depending on the risk and comorbidities of the individual patient, both for patients with classic low-flow low-gradient AS and for those with paradoxical low-flow low-gradient AS.

Echocardiography and EuroSCORE II for the stratification of low-gradient severe aortic stenosis and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction

The purpose of this study was to explore the utility of echocardiography and the EuroSCORE II in stratifying patients with low-gradient severe aortic stenosis (LG SAS) and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF ≥ 50%) with or without aortic valve intervention (AVI). The study included 323 patients with LG SAS (aortic valve area ≤ 1.0 cm² and mean pressure gradient < 40 mmHg). Patients were divided into two groups: a high-risk group (EuroSCORE II ≥ 4%, n = 115) and a low-risk group (EuroSCORE II < 4%, n = 208). Echocardiographic and clinical characteristics were analyzed. All-cause mortality was used as a clinical outcome during mean follow-up of 2 ± 1.3 years. Two-year cumulative survival was significantly lower in the high-risk group than the low-risk patients (62.3% vs. 81.7%, p = 0.001). AVI tended to reduce mortality in the high-risk patients (70% vs. 59%; p = 0.065). It did not significantly reduce mortality in the low-risk patients (82.8% with AVI vs. 81.2%, p = 0.68). Multivariable analysis identified heart failure, renal dysfunction and stroke volume index (SVi) as independent predictors for mortality. The study suggested that individualization of AVI based on risk stratification could be considered in a patient with LG SAS and preserved LVEF.