Atrial fibrillation is not an independent predictor of outcome in patients with aortic stenosis

Does Atrial Fibrillation at Diagnosis Change Prognosis in Patients with Aortic Stenosis?

Background: Aortic stenosis (AS) is a common valve disease and atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia, frequently associated with AS. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of AF on mortality in patients with moderate and severe AS. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 1070 consecutive moderate and severe AS patients (57% were male, age was 69 ± 10, severe AS 22.5%), who underwent transthoracic echocardiography from March 2018 to November 2021. AS severity was defined by specific threshold values with severe AS being defined by a peak velocity > 4 m/s, an MPG > 40 mmHg, and an AVA < 1 cm2 and moderated by a peak velocity of 3-4 m/s, an MPG 20-40 mmHg and an AVA 1-1.5 cm. Patients with AF were defined as those having a history of AF when AS was found on the index echocardiography. The follow-up assessment in December 2023 ascertained vital status and data on aortic valve replacement (AVR). Results: 790 (73.8%) patients were with sinus rhythm (SR) and 280 (26.2%) patients with AF. Mortality was higher in patients with AF than in those with SR (46% vs. 36.2% HR 1.424, 95% CI 1.121-1.809, p = 0.004). After adjusting for clinical confounders, mortality risk in AF relative to SR remained significant (HR 1.284, 95% CI 1.03-1.643, p = 0.047). Patients with AF demonstrated high mortality risk in the moderate aortic stenosis stratum (HR 1.376, 95% CI 1.059-1.788, p = 0.017), with even greater risk in the severe AS stratum (HR 1.644, 95% CI 1.038-2.603, p = 0.034) with significant interaction (p = 0.007). In patients with AF AVR demonstrated a protective effect on survival (HR 0.365, 95% CI 0.202-0.627, p < 0.001), but to a lesser degree than in patients with sinus rhythm (HR 0.376, 95% CI 0.250-0.561, p < 0.001) without significant interaction (p = 0.278). In patients with AF mortality risk was high in the conservative treatment stratum (HR 1.361, 95% CI 1.066-1.739, p = 0.014), in the AVR stratum mortality risk was higher but did not reach statistical significance (HR 1.823, 95% CI 0.973-3.414, p = 0.061). However, when corrected for echocardiographic variables strongly correlated with AF, AF was no longer independently associated with all-cause mortality. (HR 0.97 95% CI 0.709-1.323, p = 0.84). Conclusions: Patients with moderate and severe AS and AF have worse prognosis than patients with SR which can be explained by cardiac damage. AVR improves survival in patients with AF and with SR.

Association of atrial fibrillation with survival in patients with low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis with preserved ejection fraction undergoing TAVI

AIMS

There is limited evidence on the prognostic significance of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with low flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis with preserved ejection fraction (LFLG-pEF AS). We aimed to evaluate the recovery of stroke volume after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and clinical outcomes in patients with LFLG-pEF AS stratified by presence or absence of AF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In a prospective TAVI registry, patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF ≥ 50%) were stratified according to flow-gradient status and presence of AF. Among 2259 TAVI patients with preserved LVEF between August 2007 and June 2021, 765 had high-gradient AS (HG AS) and 444 had LFLG-pEF AS. AF was observed in 199 patients with HG AS (26.0%) and 190 patients with LFLG-pEF AS (42.8%). At 1 year, stroke volume index (SVi) was significantly improved in LFLG-pEF AS patients without AF, while SVi remained low in patients with AF (from 25.9 ± 8.5 mL/m2 to 37.2 ± 9.9 mL/m2 and from 26.8 ± 5.1 mL/m2 to 26.1 ± 9.1 mL/m2, respectively). LFLG-pEF AS patients with AF had an increased risk of 1-year all-cause mortality compared with those without AF (adjusted hazard ratio (HRadjusted) 2.57; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.44-4.59). LFLG-pEF AS patients without AF had similar mortality compared with HG AS patients without AF (HRadjusted 0.85; 95% CI 0.49-1.46).

CONCLUSION

Patients with LFLG-pEF AS and AF experienced no relevant recovery of stroke volume after TAVI, but a more than two-fold increased risk of death compared to patients with HG AS or LFLG-pEF AS without AF.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. NCT01368250.

The impact of atrial fibrillation on prognosis in aortic stenosis

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and aortic stenosis (AS) are both highly prevalent and often coexist. Various studies have focused on the prognostic value of AF in patients with AS, but rarely considered left ventricular (LV) diastolic function as a prognostic factor.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prognostic impact of AF in patients with AS while correcting for LV diastolic function.

METHODS

Patients with first diagnosis of significant AS were selected and stratified according to history of AF. The endpoint was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

In total, 2849 patients with significant AS (mean age 72 ± 12 years, 54.8% men) were evaluated, and 686 (24.1%) had a history of AF. During a median follow-up of 60 (30-97) months, 1182 (41.5%) patients died. Ten-year mortality rate in patients with AF was 46.8% compared to 36.8% in patients with sinus rhythm (SR) (log-rank P < 0.001). On univariable (HR: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.25-1.62; P < 0.001) and multivariable Cox regression analysis (HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.02-1.38; P = 0.026), AF was independently associated with mortality. However, when correcting for indexed left atrial volume, E/e' or both, AF was no longer independently associated with all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSION

Patients with significant AS and AF have a reduced survival as compared to patients with SR. Nonetheless, when correcting for markers of LV diastolic function, AF was not independently associated with outcomes in patients with significant AS.

Atrial fibrillation in severe aortic stenosis: Prognostic value and results of aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVES

Although atrial fibrillation (AF) is common, its impact on long-term mortality has not been reliably determined in patients with aortic stenosis (AS). We aimed to assess whether AF is associated with survival in patients with severe AS and to determine the impact of AF on the results of aortic valve replacement (AVR).

METHODS

The study included 1838 consecutive patients with severe AS (77 ± 11 years, male 47%). Upon AS diagnosis, patients were screened for AF using a 12-lead electrocardiogram. The treatment strategy (conservative management or AVR) was selected by the heart team in accordance with current guidelines. The effect of AVR on survival was analyzed as a time-dependent covariate using the entire follow-up period.

RESULTS

AF, diagnosed in 593 (32%) patients was associated with poor survival at 5 years (55 ± 2% vs 74 ± 1% for patients in sinus rhythm, P < .001), even after adjustment for established outcome predictors (hazard ratio [HR], 1.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33-1.84; P < .001). In patients with AF, AVR was associated with lower mortality (HR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.12-0.22; P < .001) even in those with no or minimal symptoms (HR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.08-0.20; P < .001). However, among patients who underwent AVR, those in AF had an excess mortality (HR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.22-2.08; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In severe AS, AF is a strong predictor of mortality even in asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic patients. After AVR, AF remains associated with poorer survival than sinus rhythm. In patients in AF, AVR is associated with lower mortality compared with conservative treatment. Further studies are needed to confirm the benefits of AVR in asymptomatic patients in AF with severe AS.

Impact of atrial fibrillation on outcomes in asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis: a propensity-matched analysis

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) portends poor prognosis in patients with aortic stenosis (AS).

Objectives

This study aimed to study the association of AF vs. sinus rhythm (SR) with outcomes in asymptomatic severe AS during routine clinical practice.

Methods

We identified 909 asymptomatic patients from 3,208 consecutive patients with aortic valve area ≤1.0 cm² and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50% at a tertiary academic center. Patients were grouped by rhythm at the time of transthoracic echocardiogram [SR: 820/909 (90%) and AF: 89/909 (10%)]. Propensity-matched analyses (2 SR:1 AF) matching 174 SR to 89 AF patients by age, sex, and clinical comorbidities were used to compare outcomes.

Results

In the propensity-matched cohort, median age (82 ± 8 vs. 81 ± 9 years, p = 0.31), sex distribution (male 58% vs. 52%, p = 0.30), and Charlson comorbidity index (4.0 vs. 3.0, p = 0.26) were not different in AF vs. SR. Median follow-up duration was 2.6 (IQR: 1.0-4.4) years. The 1-year rate of aortic valve replacement (AVR) was not different (AF: 32% vs. SR: 37%, p = 0.31). All-cause mortality was higher in AF [hazard ratio (HR): 1.68 (1.13-2.50), p = 0.009]. Independent predictors of mortality were age [HR: 1.92 (1.40-2.62), p < 0.001], Charlson comorbidity index [1.09 (1.03-1.15), p = 0.002], aortic valve peak velocity [HR: 1.87 (1.20-2.94), p = 0.006], stroke volume index [HR: 0.75 (0.60-0.93), p = 0.01], moderate or more mitral regurgitation [HR: 2.97 (1.43-6.19), p = 0.004], right ventricular systolic dysfunction [HR: 2.39 (1.29-4.43), p = 0.006], and time-dependent AVR [HR: 0.36 (0.19-0.65), p = 0.0008]. There was no significant interaction of AVR and rhythm (p = 0.57).

Conclusions

Lower forward flow, right ventricular systolic dysfunction, and mitral regurgitation identified increased risk of subsequent mortality in asymptomatic patients with AF and AS. Additional studies of risk stratification of asymptomatic AS in AF vs. SR are needed.

Clinical efficacy and safety of Cox-maze IV procedure for atrial fibrillation in patients with aortic valve calcification

Objective

Atrial fibrillation is associated with a high incidence of heart valve disease. There are few prospective clinical research comparing aortic valve replacement with and without surgical ablation for safety and effectiveness. The purpose of this study was to compare the results of aortic valve replacement with and without the Cox-maze IV procedure in patients with calcific aortic valvular disease and atrial fibrillation.

Methods

We analyzed one hundred and eight patients with calcific aortic valve disease and atrial fibrillation who underwent aortic valve replacement. Patients were divided into concomitant Cox maze surgery (Cox-maze group) and no concomitant Cox-maze operation (no Cox-maze group). After surgery, freedom from atrial fibrillation recurrence and all-cause mortality were evaluated.

Results

Freedom from all-cause mortality after aortic valve replacement at 1 year was 100% in the Cox-maze group and 89%, respectively, in the no Cox-maze group. No Cox-maze group had a lower rate of freedom from atrial fibrillation recurrence and arrhythmia control than those in the Cox-maze group (P = 0.003 and P = 0.012, respectively). Pre-operatively higher systolic blood pressure (hazard ratio, 1.096; 95% CI, 1.004–1.196; P = 0.04) and post-operatively increased right atrium diameters (hazard ratio, 1.755; 95% CI, 1.182–2.604; P = 0.005) were associated with atrial fibrillation recurrence.

Conclusion

The Cox-maze IV surgery combined with aortic valve replacement increased mid-term survival and decreased mid-term atrial fibrillation recurrence in patients with calcific aortic valve disease and atrial fibrillation. Pre-operatively higher systolic blood pressure and post-operatively increased right atrium diameters are associated with the prediction of recurrence of atrial fibrillation.

Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on Outcomes in Very Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis

The prevalence and impact of atrial fibrillation (AF) versus sinus rhythm (SR) on outcomes in very severe aortic stenosis (vsAS) of the native valve is unknown. The aim of the study was to determine the prognostic significance of AF in vsAS. A total of 563 patients with vsAS (transaortic valve peak velocity ≥5 m/s) and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50% were identified retrospectively. Patients were divided by rhythm at the time of index transthoracic echocardiogram (AF: n = 50 [9%] vs SR: n = 513 [91%]). Patients with AF were older (83.1 ± 7.5 vs 72.5 ± 12.2 y, p <0.001) and had no difference in gender distribution (p = 0.49) but had a higher Charlson co-morbidity index (2 [1,3] vs 1 [0,2], p = 0.01). There was no difference in transaortic peak velocity (5.3 ± 0.3 m/s vs 5.4 ± 0.4 m/s, p = 0.13) and left ventricular ejection fraction was comparable (63 ± 7 vs 66 ± 7%, p = 0.01). Age-, gender-, Charlson co-morbidity index-, and time-dependent aortic valve replacement (AVR)-adjusted overall mortality at 5 years was significantly higher in patients with AF than patients with SR (hazard ratio [HR] 1.88 [1.23 to 2.85], p = 0.003). AVR was associated with improved survival (HR = 0.30 [0.22 to 0.42], p <0.001), with no statistically significant interaction of AVR and rhythm (p = 0.36). Outcomes were also compared in the 2 SR:1 AF propensity-matched analyses (100 SR: 50 AF), with matching done according to age, gender, clinical co-morbidities, and year of echocardiogram. In the propensity-matched analysis, age-, gender-, and time-dependent AVR-adjusted all-cause mortality was higher in AF (HR 2.32 [1.41 to 3.82], p <0.001). In conclusion, AF was not uncommon in vsAS and identified a subset of patients at a much higher risk of mortality without AVR.

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.

Arrhythmias in Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Gaps in Knowledge and the Way Forward

The prevalence of both organic valvular heart disease (VHD) and cardiac arrhythmias is high in the general population, and their coexistence is common. Both VHD and arrhythmias in the elderly lead to an elevated risk of hospitalization and use of health services. However, the relationships of the two conditions is not fully understood and our understanding of their coexistence in terms of contemporary management and prognosis is still limited. VHD-induced left ventricular dysfunction/hypertrophy and left atrial dilation lead to both atrial and ventricular arrhythmias. On the other hand, arrhythmias can be considered as an independent condition resulting from a coexisting ischemic or non-ischemic substrate or idiopathic ectopy. Both atrial and ventricular VHD-induced arrhythmias may contribute to clinical worsening and be a turning point in the natural history of VHD. Symptoms developed in patients with VHD are not specific and may be attributable to hemodynamical consequences of valve disease but also to other cardiac conditions including arrhythmias which are notably prevalent in this population. The issue how to distinguish symptoms related to VHD from those related to atrial fibrillation (AF) during decision making process remains challenging. Moreover, AF is a traditional limit of echocardiography and an important source of errors in assessment of the severity of VHD. Despite recent progress in understanding the pathophysiology and prognosis of postoperative AF, many questions remain regarding its prevention and management. Furthermore, life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias can predispose patients with VHD to sudden cardiac death. Evidence for a putative link between arrhythmias and outcome in VHD is growing but available data on targeted therapies for VHD-related arrhythmias, including monitoring and catheter ablation, is scarce. Despite growing evidences, more research focused on the prognosis and optimal management of VHD-related arrhythmias is still required. We aimed to review the current evidence and identify gaps in knowledge about the prevalence, prognostic considerations, and treatment of atrial and ventricular arrhythmias in common subtypes of organic VHD.

Epidemiology of Aortic Stenosis/Aortic Valve Replacement (from the Nationwide Swedish Renal Registry)

Contemporary data on the prevalence and incidence of aortic stenosis (AS) and aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients initiating dialysis are scarce. This observational cohort study aimed to estimate (1) the point prevalence of AS and AVR at dialysis start and (2) the AS incidence and associated factors prospective to dialysis initiation. The study included 14,550 patients initiating dialysis registered in the Swedish Renal Registry between 2005 and 2018. AS was defined by the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes, and AVR by the surgical procedure codes. Associations between covariates and outcomes were assessed in Cox regression models. The median age was 68 (57 to 77), 66% were males, and the point prevalence of AS and AVR was 3.4% and 1.1%, respectively. In those without known AS/AVR at dialysis initiation (n = 14,050), AS was diagnosed in 595 patients (incidence 16.3/1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval [CI] 15.1 to 17.7/1,000 person-years) during a median follow-up of 2.7 years (interquartile range 1.1 to 5.7). In adjusted Cox regression models, higher age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.03, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.04), male gender (HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.83), atrial fibrillation (HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.64), and hypertension (HR 1.65, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.65) were associated with incident AS. Peritoneal dialysis patients had a nonsignificant trend toward higher AS risk compared with hemodialysis (HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.40). About 20% of patients (n = 113) diagnosed with incident AS underwent AVR (incidence 3.1/1000 person-years, 95% CI 2.6 to 3.7/1,000). Only the male gender was associated with AVR (HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.30 to 3.30). In conclusion, the prevalence and incidence of AS and AVR in patients initiating dialysis are high. A fifth of newly diagnosed AS underwent AVR after dialysis onset.

Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on Outcomes of Aortic Valve Implantation

New or preexisting atrial fibrillation (AF) is frequent in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. We evaluated whether the presence of AF during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) impacts the length of stay, healthcare adjusted costs, and inpatient mortality. The median length of stay in the patients with AF increased by 33.3% as compared with those without AF undergoing TAVI and SAVR (5 [3 to 8] days vs 3 [2 to 6] days, p <0.0001 and 8 [6 to 12] days vs 6 [5 to 10] days, p <0.0001, respectively). AF increased the median value of adjusted healthcare associated costs of both TAVI ($46,754 [36,613 to 59,442] vs $49,960 [38,932 to 64,201], p <0.0001) and SAVR ($40,948 [31,762 to 55,854] vs $45,683 [35,154 to 63,026], p <0.0001). The presence of AF did not independently increase the in-hospital mortality. In conclusion, in patients undergoing SAVR or TAVI, AF significantly increased the length of stay and adjusted healthcare adjusted costs but did not independently increase the in-hospital mortality.

Post-operative Atrial Fibrillation Impacts on Outcomes in Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) in severe aortic stenosis (AS) has poor outcomes after transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement (TAVR and SAVR, respectively). We compared the incidence of AF after aortic valve replacement (AVR) according to the treatment method and the impact of AF on outcomes.

Methods: We investigated the incidence of AF and clinical outcomes of AVR according to whether AF occurred after TAVR and SAVR after propensity score (PS)-matching for 1 year follow-up. Clinical outcomes were defined as death, stroke, and admission due to heart failure. The composite outcome comprised death, stroke, and admission due to heart failure.

Results: A total of 221 patients with severe AS were enrolled consecutively, 100 of whom underwent TAVR and 121 underwent SAVR. The incidence of newly detected AF was significantly higher in the SAVR group before PS-matching (6.0 vs. 40.5%, P < 0.001) and after PS-matching (7.5 vs. 35.6%, P = 0.001). TAVR and SAVR showed no significant differences in outcomes except in terms of stroke. In the TAVR group, AF history did not affect the outcomes; however, in the SAVR group, AF history affected death (log rank P = 0.038). Post-AVR AF had a worse impact on admission due to heart failure (log rank P = 0.049) and composite outcomes in the SAVR group. Post-AVR AF had a worse impact on admission due to heart failure (log rank P = 0.008) and composite outcome in the TAVR group.

Conclusion: Post-AVR AF could be considered as a predictor of the outcomes of AVR. TAVR might be a favorable treatment option for patients with severe symptomatic AS who are at high-risk for AF development or who have a history of AF because the occurrence of AF was more frequent in the SAVR group.

Effectiveness and Safety of NOAC Versus Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Aortic Stenosis

Background

Guideline recommendations on the use of non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with aortic stenosis are based on studies including a low number of patients with aortic stenosis. The aim of this study was to estimate the effects of NOAC versus warfarin on thromboembolism and major bleeding among AF patients with aortic stenosis.

Methods and Results

We emulated a target trial using observational data from Danish nationwide registries between 2013 and 2018. Thromboembolism was defined as a hospital diagnosis of ischemic stroke and/or systemic embolism, and major bleeding was defined as a hospital diagnosis of intracranial bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, or major or clinically relevant bleeding in other anatomic sites. Treatment effect estimates were based on an intention‐to‐treat and per‐protocol approach. A total of 3726 patients with AF and aortic stenosis claimed a prescription for either a NOAC (2357 patients) or warfarin (1369 patients) and met the eligibility criteria for the trial. During 3 years of follow‐up, the adjusted hazard ratios for thromboembolism and major bleeding were 1.62 (95% CI, 1.08–2.45) and 0.73 (0.59–0.91) for NOAC compared with warfarin in the intention‐to‐treat analyses. Similar results were observed in the per‐protocol analyses.

Conclusions

In this observational study, we observed a higher risk of thromboembolism but a lower risk of major bleeding for treatment with NOACs compared with warfarin in patients with AF and aortic stenosis. This observation needs confirmation in large randomized trials in these commonly encountered patients.

Doppler Mean Gradient Is Discordant to Aortic Valve Calcium Scores in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Doppler mean gradient (MG) may underestimate aortic stenosis (AS) severity when obtained during atrial fibrillation (AF) because of lower forward flow compared with sinus rhythm (SR). Whether AS is more advanced at the time of referral for aortic valve intervention in AF compared with SR is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine flow-independent computed tomographic aortic valve calcium scores (AVCS) and their concordance to MG in AF versus SR in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

METHODS

Patients who underwent TAVR from 2016 to 2020 for native valve severe AS with left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 50% were identified from an institutional TAVR database. MGs during AF and SR in high-gradient AS (HGAS) and low-gradient AS (LGAS) were compared with AVCS (AVCS/MG ratio). AVCS were obtained within 90 days of pre-TAVR echocardiography.

RESULTS

Six hundred thirty-three patients were included; median age was 82 years (interquartile range [IQR], 76-86 years), and 46% were women. AF was present in 109 (17%) and SR in 524 (83%) patients during echocardiography. Aortic valve area index was slightly smaller in AF versus SR (0.43 cm²/m² [IQR, 0.39-0.47 cm²/m²] vs 0.46 cm²/m² [IQR, 0.41-0.51 cm²/m²], P = .0003). Stroke volume index, transaortic flow rate, and MG were lower in AF (P < .0001 for all). AVCS were higher in men with AF compared with SR (3,510 Agatston units [AU] [IQR, 2,803-4,030 AU] vs 2,722 AU [IQR, 2,180-3,467 AU], P < .0001) in HGAS but not in LGAS. AVCS were not different in women with AF versus SR. Overall AVCS/MG ratios were higher in AF versus SR in HGAS and LGAS (P < .03 for all), except in women with LGAS.

CONCLUSIONS

AVCS were higher than expected by MG in AF compared with SR. The very high AVCS in men with AF and HGAS at the time of TAVR suggests late diagnosis of severe AS because of underestimated AS severity during progressive AS and/or late referral to TAVR. Additional studies are needed to examine the extent to which echocardiography may be underestimating AS severity in AF.

High Prevalence of Severe Aortic Stenosis in Low-Flow State Associated With Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a low-flow state and may underestimate aortic stenosis (AS) severity. Single-high Doppler signals (HS) consistent with severe AS (peak velocity ≥4 m/s or mean gradient ≥40 mm Hg) are averaged down in current practice. The objective for the study was to determine the significance of HS in AF low-gradient AS (LGAS).

METHODS

One thousand five hundred forty-one patients with aortic valve area ≤1 cm² and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50% were identified and classified as high-gradient AS (HGAS) (≥40 mm Hg) and LGAS (<40 mm Hg), and AF versus sinus rhythm (SR). Available computed tomography aortic valve calcium scores (AVCS) were retrieved from the medical record. Outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Mean age was 76±11 years, female 47%. Mean gradient was 51±12 in SR-HGAS, 48±10 in AF-HGAS, 31±5 in SR-LGAS, and 29±7 mm Hg in AF-LGAS, all P≤0.001 versus SR-HGAS; HS were present in 33% of AF-LGAS. AVCS were available in 34%. Compared with SR-HGAS (2409 arbitrary units; interquartile range, 1581-3462) AVCS were higher in AF-HGAS (2991 arbitrary units; IQR1978-4229, P=0.001), not different in AF-LGAS (2399 arbitrary units; IQR1817-2810, P=0.47), and lower in SR-LGAS (1593 arbitrary units; IQR945-1832, P<0.001); AVCS in AF-LGAS were higher when HS were present (P=0.048). Compared with SR-HGAS, the age-, sex-, comorbidity index-, and time-dependent aortic valve replacement-adjusted mortality risk was higher in AF-HGAS (hazard ratio=1.82 [1.40-2.36], P<0.001) and AF-LGAS with HS (hazard ratio=1.54 [1.04-2.26], P=0.03) but not different in AF-LGAS without HS or SR-LGAS (both P=not significant).

CONCLUSIONS

Severe AS was common in AF-LGAS. AVCS in AF-LGAS were not different from SR-HGAS. AVCS were higher and mortality worse in AF-LGAS when HS were present.

Impact of Reverse Left Ventricular Remodeling on Outcomes of Patients with Anomalous Left Coronary Artery from the Pulmonary Artery after Surgical Correction

The impact of reverse left ventricular remodeling (r-LVR) on clinical outcomes after surgical correction of anomalous left coronary artery from the pulmonary artery (ALCAPA) remains unclear. This study aims to examine the prognostic significance of r-LVR in patients with ALCAPA after surgery. We prospectively identified 61 patients undergoing surgical correction for ALCAPA; 54 patients had adequate echocardiographic image quality with quantitative biplane analysis performed both at baseline and at 30-day postoperative follow-up. Postoperative r-LVR was defined as a reduction of ≥ 10% in left ventricular end-diastolic volume index during follow-up. Cox proportional-hazards regression was used to investigate the independent association of r-LVR and all-cause mortality. Among 54 patients (age: 21.2 ± 7 months; 37% females), r-LVR occurred in 35 patients (64.8%) after surgery. Compared to patients with r-LVR, patients without r-LVR had significantly higher level of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) [2176 (711, 4219) vs 998 (623, 2145) P < 0.001] and lower survival rate (47.3% vs 82.9%, HR = 5.72 [1.96 to 17.20], P < 0.001) at 1-year follow-up. NT-proBNP (OR = 2.27 [1.67 to 18.3], P = 0.02) was an independent predictor of r-LVR in multivariate analysis. Moreover, r-LVR was significantly associated with a lower rate of all-cause mortality (HR = 0.27 [0.08 to 0.98], P = 0.03) in multivariate analysis, even after adjustment for clinical and echocardiographic variables. R-LVR occurred in more than half of patients with ALCAPA undergoing surgical correction and it was associated with better clinical outcomes. NT-proBNP is an independent predictor of r-LVR.

Advances in the Treatment of Cardiac Amyloidosis

OPINION STATEMENT

Cardiac amyloidosis is associated with a high mortality rate, a long delay between the first signs and the diagnosis but a short interval between diagnosis and death. This scenario has changed recently due to improved disease awareness among doctors and significant progress in diagnosis thanks to multimodal imaging and a multidisciplinary approach. Therefore, during the last few years, we have had access to specific therapies for those patients. Those therapies are quite different depending on the type of amyloidosis, but there has been real progress. Systemic light chain amyloidosis (AL) with cardiac involvement is the most common form of cardiac amyloidosis. The severity of heart disease dictates the prognosis in AL amyloidosis. Advances in chemotherapy and immunotherapy that suppress light chain production have improved the outcomes. These recent improvements in survival rates have enabled therapies such as implanted cardiac defibrillators and heart transplantation that were usually not indicated for patients with advanced light chain amyloid cardiomyopathy to now be applied in selected patients. For transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR), the second most common form of amyloidosis with cardiac involvement, there is also significant progress in treatment. Until recently, we had no specific therapy for ATTR cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM), though now disease-modifying therapies are available. Therapies that stabilize transthyretin, such as tafamidis, have been shown to improve outcomes for patients with ATTR-CM. Modern treatments that stop the synthesis of TTR through gene silencing, such as patisiran and inotersen, have shown positive results for patients with TTR amyloidosis. Significant progress has been made in the treatment of amyloid cardiomyopathy, and hopefully, we will see even more progress with the spread of those treatments. We now can be optimistic about patients with this disease.

Hemodynamic profile of patients with severe aortic valve stenosis and atrial fibrillation versus sinus rhythm

BACKGROUND

In patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS), atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with increased long-term mortality after aortic valve replacement (AVR), which may be due to unfavorable hemodynamics in AF. We aimed to analyze the hemodynamic profile of patients with severe AS and AF versus sinus rhythm (SR).

METHODS

We performed cardiac catheterization in 486 patients (age 74 ± 10 years, 58% males) with severe AS [indexed aortic valve area 0.41 ± 0.13 cm², left ventricular ejection fraction 58 ± 12%]: 50 patients had AF, and 436 patients had SR. All patients underwent surgical (n = 350) or transcatheter (n = 136) AVR.

RESULTS

Despite similar indexed aortic valve area (0.41 ± 0.11 vs. 0.41 ± 0.12 cm²/m²; p = 0.45) patients with AF had lower left ventricular ejection fraction, larger left atrial size, lower tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, higher mean pulmonary artery pressure (34 ± 13 vs. 24 ± 9 mmHg), mean pulmonary artery wedge pressure (mPAWP; 22 ± 8 vs. 15 ± 7 mmHg), and pulmonary vascular resistance (2.8 ± 1.9 vs. 2.0 ± 1.3 Wood units) and lower stroke volume index (26 ± 9 vs. 37 ± 10 ml/m²) than patients with SR (p < 0.05 for all). Patients with AF and SR had a different mPAWP-left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) relationship with higher mPAWP in AF and higher LVEDP in SR. After a median follow-up of 49 (interquartile range, 35-64) months post-AVR patients with AF (p = 0.05) and patients with a larger difference between mPAWP and LVEDP (p = 0.005) had higher mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with severe AS and concomitant AF have a distinct and significantly worse hemodynamic profile compared to patients with SR associated with worse clinical outcome.