A risk prediction model in asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis: CURRENT-AS risk score

Atrial fibrillation in patients with severe aortic stenosis

BACKGROUND

There has been no previous report evaluating the long impact of atrial fibrillation (AF) on the clinical outcomes stratified by the initial management [conservative or aortic valve replacement (AVR)] strategies of severe aortic stenosis (AS).

METHODS

We analyzed 3815 patients with severe AS enrolled in the CURRENT AS registry. Patients with AF were defined as those having a history of AF when severe AS was found on the index echocardiography. The primary outcome measure was a composite of aortic valve-related death or hospitalization for heart failure.

RESULTS

The cumulative 5-year incidence of the primary outcome measure was significantly higher in patients with AF than in those without AF (44.2 % versus 33.2 %, HR 1.54, 95 % CI 1.35-1.76). After adjusting for confounders, the risk of AF relative to no AF remained significant (HR 1.34, 95 % CI 1.16-1.56). The magnitude of excess adjusted risk of AF for the primary outcome measure was greater in the initial AVR stratum (N = 1197, HR 1.95, 95 % CI 1.36-2.78) than in the conservative stratum (N = 2618, HR 1.26, 95 % CI 1.08-1.47) with a significant interaction (p = 0.04). In patients with AF, there was a significant excess adjusted risk of paroxysmal AF (N = 254) relative to chronic AF (N = 528) for the primary outcome measure (HR 1.34, 95 % CI 1.01-1.78).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe AS, concomitant AF was independently associated with worse clinical outcomes regardless of the initial management strategies. In those patients with conservative strategy, paroxysmal AF is stronger risk factor than chronic AF.

The collateral damage of COVID-19 to cardiovascular services: a meta-analysis

AIMS

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on care and outcomes across non-COVID-19 cardiovascular (CV) diseases is unknown. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to quantify the effect and investigate for variation by CV disease, geographic region, country income classification and the time course of the pandemic.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From January 2019 to December 2021, Medline and Embase databases were searched for observational studies comparing a pandemic and pre-pandemic period with relation to CV disease hospitalisations, diagnostic and interventional procedures, outpatient consultations, and mortality. Observational data were synthesised by incidence rate ratios (IRR) and risk ratios (RR) for binary outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021265930). A total of 158 studies, covering 49 countries and 6 continents, were used for quantitative synthesis. Most studies (80%) reported information for high-income countries (HICs). Across all CV disease and geographies there were fewer hospitalisations, diagnostic and interventional procedures, and outpatient consultations during the pandemic. By meta-regression, in low-middle income countries (LMICs) compared to HICs the decline in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) hospitalisations (RR 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.94) and revascularisation (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62-0.87) was more severe. In LMICs, but not HICs, in-hospital mortality increased for STEMI (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.10-1.37) and heart failure (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.04-1.12). The magnitude of decline in hospitalisations for CV diseases did not differ between the first and second wave.

CONCLUSIONS

There was substantial global collateral CV damage during the COVID-19 pandemic with disparity in severity by country income classification.

One and Five-Year Mortality Risk Prediction in Patients with Moderate and Severe Aortic Stenosis

(1) Background: Our goal was to develop a risk prediction model for mortality in patients with moderate and severe aortic stenosis (AS). (2) Methods: All patients aged 40−95 years, with echocardiographic evidence of moderate and severe AS at a single institution, were studied over a median of 2.8 (1.5−4.8) years, between 2013−2018. Patient characteristics and mortality were compared using Chi-squares, t-tests, and Kaplan−Meier (KM) curves, as appropriate. The risk calculation for mortality was derived using the Cox proportional hazards model. A risk score was calculated for each parameter, and the total sum of scores predicted the individualized risks of 1-and 5-year mortality. (3) Results: A total of 1991 patients with severe and 2212 with moderate AS were included. Severe AS patients were older, had a lower ejection fraction %, were more likely to be Caucasian, and had lower rates of obesity and smoking, but had higher rates of cardiac comorbidities and AVR (49.3% vs. 2.8%, p < 0.0001). The unadjusted overall mortality was 41.7% vs. 41%, p = 0.6530, and was not different using KM curves (log rank, p = 0.0853). The models included only patients with complete follow-up (3966 in the 1-year, and 816 in the 5-year model) and included 13 variables related to patient characteristics, degree of AS, and AVR. The C-statistic was 0.75 and 0.72 for the 1-year and the 5-year models, respectively. (4) Conclusions: Patients with moderate and severe AS experience high morbidity and mortality. The usage of a risk prediction model may provide guidance for clinical decision making in complex patients.

Diabetes Mellitus and Its Implications in Aortic Stenosis Patients

Aortic stenosis (AS) and diabetes mellitus (DM) are both progressive diseases that if left untreated, result in significant morbidity and mortality. Several studies revealed that the prevalence of DM is substantially higher in patients with AS and, thus, the progression from mild to severe AS is greater in those patients with DM. DM and common comorbidities associated with both diseases, DM and AS, increase patient management complexity and make aortic valve replacement the only effective treatment. For that reason, a better understanding of the pathogenesis underlying both these diseases and the relationships between them is necessary to design more appropriate preventive and therapeutic approaches. In this review, we provided an overview of the main aspects of the relationship between AS and DM, including common comorbidities and risk factors. We also discuss the established treatments/therapies in patients with AS and DM.

Cardiac Imaging of Aortic Valve Area From 34 287 UK Biobank Participants Reveals Novel Genetic Associations and Shared Genetic Comorbidity With Multiple Disease Phenotypes

Background:

The aortic valve is an important determinant of cardiovascular physiology and anatomic location of common human diseases.

Methods:

From a sample of 34 287 white British ancestry participants, we estimated functional aortic valve area by planimetry from prospectively obtained cardiac magnetic resonance imaging sequences of the aortic valve. Aortic valve area measurements were submitted to genome-wide association testing, followed by polygenic risk scoring and phenome-wide screening, to identify genetic comorbidities.

Results:

A genome-wide association study of aortic valve area in these UK Biobank participants showed 3 significant associations, indexed by rs71190365 (chr13:50764607, DLEU1 , P =1.8×10 −9 ), rs35991305 (chr12:94191968, CRADD , P =3.4×10 −8 ), and chr17:45013271:C:T ( GOSR2 , P =5.6×10 −8 ). Replication on an independent set of 8145 unrelated European ancestry participants showed consistent effect sizes in all 3 loci, although rs35991305 did not meet nominal significance. We constructed a polygenic risk score for aortic valve area, which in a separate cohort of 311 728 individuals without imaging demonstrated that smaller aortic valve area is predictive of increased risk for aortic valve disease (odds ratio, 1.14; P =2.3×10 −6 ). After excluding subjects with a medical diagnosis of aortic valve stenosis (remaining n=308 683 individuals), phenome-wide association of >10 000 traits showed multiple links between the polygenic score for aortic valve disease and key health-related comorbidities involving the cardiovascular system and autoimmune disease. Genetic correlation analysis supports a shared genetic etiology with between aortic valve area and birth weight along with other cardiovascular conditions.

Conclusions:

These results illustrate the use of automated phenotyping of cardiac imaging data from the general population to investigate the genetic etiology of aortic valve disease, perform clinical prediction, and uncover new clinical and genetic correlates of cardiac anatomy.

Unsupervised Cluster Analysis of Patients With Aortic Stenosis Reveals Distinct Population With Different Phenotypes and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of studies investigating the heterogeneity of patients with aortic stenosis (AS). We explored whether cluster analysis identifies distinct subgroups with different prognostic significances in AS.

METHODS

Newly diagnosed patients with moderate or severe AS were prospectively enrolled between 2013 and 2016 (n=398, mean 71 years, 55% male). Among demographics, laboratory, and echocardiography parameters (n=32), 11 variables were selected through dimension reduction and used for unsupervised clustering. Phenotypes and causes of mortality were compared between the clusters.

RESULTS

Three clusters with markedly different features were identified. Cluster 1 (n=60) was predominantly associated with cardiac dysfunction, cluster 2 (n=86) consisted of elderly with comorbidities, especially end-stage renal disease, whereas cluster 3 (n=252) demonstrated neither cardiac dysfunction nor comorbidities. Although AS severity did not differ, there was a significant difference in adverse outcomes between the clusters during a median 2.4 years follow-up (mortality rate, 13.3% versus 19.8% versus 6.0% for cluster 1, 2, and 3, P<0.001). Particularly, compared with cluster 3, cluster 1 was associated with only cardiac mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 7.37 [95% CI, 2.00-27.13]; P=0.003), whereas cluster 2 was associated with higher noncardiac mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.35 [95% CI, 1.26-8.90]; P=0.015). Phenotypes and association of clusters with specific outcomes were reproduced in an independent validation cohort (n=262).

CONCLUSIONS

Unsupervised cluster analysis of patients with AS revealed 3 distinct groups with different causes of death. This provides a new perspective in the categorization of patients with AS that takes into account comorbidities and extravalvular cardiac dysfunction.

Contemporary issues in severe aortic stenosis: review of current and future strategies from the Contemporary Outcomes after Surgery and Medical Treatment in Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis registry

Contemporary Outcomes after Surgery and Medical Treatment in Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis (CURRENT AS) registry was a large Japanese multicentre retrospective registry of consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) before introduction of transcatheter aortic valve implantation. We sought to overview the data from the CURRENT AS registry to discuss the three major contemporary issues related to clinical practice in patients with severe AS: (1) under-referral/underuse of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in symptomatic patients with severe AS, (2) management of asymptomatic patients with severe AS and (3) management of patients with low-gradient severe aortic stenosis (LG-AS). First, despite the dismal prognosis of symptomatic patients with severe AS, SAVR, including those performed during follow-up, was reported to be underused. In the CURRENT AS registry, overall 53% of symptomatic patients underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) during follow-up. Second, we reported that compared with conservative strategy, initial AVR strategy was associated with lower risk of all-cause death and heart failure hospitalisation in asymptomatic patients with severe AS. Although current recommendations for AVR are mainly dependent on the patient symptoms, some patients may not complain of any symptom because of their sedentary lifestyle. We also reported several important objective factors associated with worse clinical outcomes in asymptomatic patients with severe AS for risk stratification. Finally, initial AVR strategy was associated with better long-term clinical outcomes than conservative strategy in both patients with high-gradient AS and patients with LG-AS. The favourable effect of initial AVR strategy was also seen in patients with LG-AS with left ventricular ejection fraction of ≥50%.