Left Ventricular Diastolic Dysfunction in Cardiac Surgery: A Narrative Review

Cardiac relaxation is a complex process that involves various interconnected characteristics and, along with contractile properties, determines stroke volume. Perioperative ischemia-reperfusion injury and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (DD) are characterized by the left ventricle's inability to receive a sufficient blood volume under adequate preload. Baseline DD and perioperative DD have an impact on postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and major clinical outcomes in a variety of cardiac pathologies. Several baseline and perioperative factors, such as age, female sex, hypertension, left ventricle hypertrophy, diabetes, and perioperative ischemia-reperfusion injury, contribute to the risk of DD. The recommended diagnostic criteria available in guidelines have not been validated in the perioperative settings and still need clarification. Timely diagnosis of DD might be crucial for effectively treating postoperative low cardiac output syndrome. This implies the need for an individualized approach to fluid infusion strategy, cardiac rate and rhythm control, identification of extrinsic causes, and administration of drugs with lusitropic effects. The purpose of this review is to consolidate scattered information on various aspects of diastolic dysfunction in cardiac surgery and provide readers with well-organized and clinically applicable information.

Determinants and prognostic implications of left atrial reverse remodelling after coarctation of aorta repair in adults

AIMS

Left atrial (LA) dysfunction and atrial fibrillation are also relatively common in adults with coarctation of aorta (COA), and the severity of LA dysfunction is associated with a higher risk of atrial fibrillation in this population. The purpose of this study was to determine whether LA function improved after COA repair (LA reverse remodelling), and the relationship between LA reverse remodelling and atrial fibrillation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Retrospective cohort study of adults undergoing COA repair (2003-20). LA reservoir strain was assessed pre intervention and 12-24 months post intervention, using speckle tracking echocardiography. Incident atrial fibrillation was assessed from COA repair to last follow-up. Of 261 adults who underwent COA repair [age 37 ± 13 years; males 148 (57%)], 124 (47%) and 137 (53%) presented with native vs. recurrent COA, respectively. Of 261 patients, 231 (82%) and 48 (18%) underwent surgical and transcatheter COA repair, respectively. The LA reservoir strain increased from 32 ± 8% (pre intervention) to 39 ± 7% (post intervention), yielding a relative increase of 21 ± 5%. Older age [β ± standard error (SE) -0.16 ± 0.09 per 5 years, P = 0.02], higher systolic blood pressure (β ± SE -0.12 ± 0.04 per 5 mmHg, P = 0.005), and higher residual COA mean gradient (β ± SE -0.17 ± 0.06 per 5 mmHg, P = 0.002) post intervention were associated with less LA reverse remodelling, after adjustment for sex, hypertension diagnosis, and left ventricular indices. LA reverse remodelling (hazard ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.96-0.98 per 1% increase from pre-intervention LA function, P = 0.006) was associated with a lower risk of atrial fibrillation after adjustment for age, sex, pre-intervention LA reservoir strain, and history of atrial fibrillation.

CONCLUSION

COA repair resulted in improved LA function and decreased risk for atrial fibrillation, especially in patients without residual hypertension or significant residual COA gradient.

Coarctation of aorta is associated with left ventricular stiffness, left atrial dysfunction and pulmonary hypertension

BACKGROUND

Brachial systolic blood pressure (BP) is the most commonly used metric for monitoring hypertension. However, recent studies suggest that brachial systolic BP underestimates left ventricle (LV) systolic load in patients with coarctation of aorta (COA). Since brachial systolic BP is used as a surrogate of arterial afterload in clinical practice, it is important to determine how well it correlates with LV remodeling and stiffness in patients with COA as compared to patients with idiopathic hypertension.

METHODS

This is cross-sectional study of COA patients with hypertension (COA group) and adults with idiopathic hypertension (control group). Both groups were matched 1:1 based on age, sex, BMI and systolic BP. We hypothesized that the COA group will have higher LV systolic and diastolic stiffness, and more advanced left atrial remodeling and pulmonary hypertension. We assessed LV systolic stiffness using end-systolic elastance, and diastolic stiffness using LV stiffness constant and chamber capacitance (LV-end-diastolic volume at an end-diastolic pressure of 20mm Hg) RESULTS: There were 112 patients in each group. Although both groups had similar systolic BP, the COA group had a higher end-systolic elastance (2.37 ± 0.74 vs 2.11 ± 0.54 mm Hg/mL, P= .008), higher LV stiffness constant (6.91 ± 0.81 vs 5.93 ± 0.79, P= .006) and lower LV-end-diastolic volume at an end-diastolic pressure of 20mm Hg (58 ± 9 vs 67 ± 11 mL/m2, P< .001). Additionally, the COA group had more advanced left atrial remodeling and higher pulmonary artery pressures which is corroborating evidence of high LV filling pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

COA patients have more LV stiffness and abnormal hemodynamics compared to non-COA patients with similar systolic BP, suggesting that systolic BP may underestimate LV systolic load in this population. Further studies are required to determine whether the observed LV stiffness and dysfunction translates to more cardiovascular events during follow-up, and whether adopting a stricter systolic BP target in clinical practice or changing threshold for COA intervention will lead to less LV stiffness and better clinical outcomes.

The year 2020 in the European Heart Journal-Cardiovascular Imaging: part II

The European Heart Journal-Cardiovascular Imaging was launched in 2012 and has during these years become one of the leading multimodality cardiovascular imaging journal. The journal is now established as one of the top cardiovascular journals and is the most important cardiovascular imaging journal in Europe. The most important studies published in our Journal from 2020 will be highlighted in two reports. Part II will focus on valvular heart disease, heart failure, cardiomyopathies, and congenital heart disease. While Part I of the review has focused on studies about myocardial function and risk prediction, myocardial ischaemia, and emerging techniques in cardiovascular imaging.

The year 2020 in the European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging: part I

The European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging was launched in 2012 and has during these 9 years become one of the leading multimodality cardiovascular imaging journals. The journal is currently ranked as number 20 among all cardiovascular journals. Our journal is well established as one of the top cardiovascular journals and is the most important cardiovascular imaging journal in Europe. The most important studies published in our Journal in 2020 will be highlighted in two reports. Part I of the review will focus on studies about myocardial function and risk prediction, myocardial ischaemia, and emerging techniques in cardiovascular imaging, while Part II will focus on valvular heart disease, heart failure, cardiomyopathies, and congenital heart disease.