Projected valve area at normal flow rate improves the assessment of stenosis severity in patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis: the multicenter TOPAS (Truly or Pseudo-Severe Aortic Stenosis) study

Dobutamine Stress Echocardiography in Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis

IMPORTANCE

Guidelines recommend the use of dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) in patients with low-gradient aortic stenosis (AS) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50%. However, a paucity of DSE data exists when LVEF >35%.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the diagnostic accuracy of DSE in patients with low-gradient AS with a wide range of LVEF and to examine the interaction between the diagnostic accuracy of DSE and LVEF.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients with mean gradient <40 mm Hg, aortic valve area <1.0 cm2, and stroke volume index ≤35 mL/m2 undergoing DSE and cardiac computer tomography (C-CT) were identified from 3 prospectively collected patient cohorts and stratified according to LVEF: LVEF<35%, LVEF 35% to 50%, and LVEF>50%.

EXPOSURE

Dobutamine stress echocardiography and C-CT were performed on patients with low-gradient AS.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Severe AS was defined as aortic valve calcification score ≥2,000 arbitrary units (AU) among men and ≥1,200 AU for women on C-CT.

RESULTS

Of 221 patients included in the study, 78 (35%) presented with LVEF <35%, 67 (30%) with LVEF 35% to 50%, and 76 (34%) with LVEF >50%. Mean-gradient and aortic valve peak velocity during DSE showed significant diagnostic heterogeneity between LVEF groups, being most precise when LVEF <35% (both areas under the curve [AUC] = 0.90), albeit with optimal thresholds of 30 mm Hg and 377 cm/sec and a limited diagnostic yield in patients with LVEF ≥35% (AUC = 0.67 and 0.66 in LVEF 35% to 50% and AUC = 0.65 and 0.60 in LVEF ≥50%). Using guideline thresholds led to a sensitivity/specificity of 49%/84% for all patients with LVEF <50%.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

While DSE is safe and leads to an increase in stroke volume in patients with low-gradient AS regardless of LVEF, the association between DSE gradients and AS severity assessed by C-CT demonstrates important heterogeneity depending on LVEF, with the highest accuracy in patients with LVEF <35%.

A Novel Echocardiographic Parameter to Confirm Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis Severity

Background

In patients with low-gradient (LG) aortic stenosis (AS), confirming disease severity and indication of intervention often requires dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) or aortic valve calcium scoring by computed tomography. We hypothesized that the mean transvalvular pressure gradient to effective orifice area ratio (MG/EOA, in mm Hg/cm2) measured during rest echocardiography identifies true-severe AS (TSAS) and is associated with clinical outcomes in patients with low-flow, LG-AS.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic value of MG/EOA ratio.

Methods

The diagnostic accuracy of MG/EOA ratio to identify TSAS was retrospectively assessed in: 1) an in vitro data set obtained in a circulatory model including 93 experimental conditions; and 2) an in vivo data set of 188 patients from the TOPAS (True or Pseudo-Severe Aortic Stenosis) study (NCT01835028). Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess the diagnostic accuracy of MG/EOA ratio for identifying TSAS, and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to assess its association with clinical outcomes.

Results

The optimal cutoff of MG/EOA ratio to identify TSAS in patients with low-flow, LG-AS was ≥25 mm Hg/cm2 (correct classification 85%), as well as in vitro (100%). During a median follow-up of 1.41 ± 0.75 years, 146 (78%) patients met the composite endpoint of aortic valve replacement or all-cause mortality. A MG/EOA ratio ≥25 mm Hg/cm2 was independently associated with an increased risk of the composite endpoint (adjusted HR: 2.36 [95% CI: 1.63-3.42], P < 0.001). The Harell's C-index of MG/EOA was 0.68, equaling projected EOA (0.67) measured by DSE.

Conclusions

MG/EOA ratio can be useful in low-flow, LG-AS to confirm AS severity and may complement DSE or aortic valve calcium scoring.

Moderate Aortic Stenosis-Advanced Imaging, Risk Assessment, and Treatment Strategies

Moderate aortic stenosis is increasingly recognized as a disease entity with poor prognosis. Diagnosis of moderate aortic stenosis may be complemented by laboratory tests and advanced imaging techniques focused at detecting signs of cardiac damage such as increase of cardiac enzymes (N-terminal pro-B-type Natriuretic Peptide, troponin), left ventricular remodeling (hypertrophy, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction), or myocardial fibrosis. Therapy should include guideline-directed optimal medical therapy for heart failure. Patients with signs of cardiac damage may benefit from early intervention, which is the focus of several ongoing randomized controlled trials. As yet, no evidence-based therapy exists to halt the progression of aortic valve calcification.

Diagnostic Value of Aortic Valve Calcification Levels in the Assessment of Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis

BACKGROUND

In patients with low-gradient aortic stenosis (AS) and low transvalvular flow, dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) is recommended to determine AS severity, whereas the degree of aortic valve calcification (AVC) supposedly correlates with AS severity according to current European and American guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between AVC and AS severity as determined using echocardiography and DSE in patients with aortic valve area <1 cm2 and peak aortic valve velocity <4.0 m/s.

METHODS

All patients underwent DSE to determine AS severity and multislice computed tomography to quantify AVC. Receiver-operating characteristics curve analysis was used to assess the diagnostic value of AVC for AS severity grading as determined using echocardiography and DSE in men and women.

RESULTS

A total of 214 patients were included. Median age was 78 years (25th-75th percentile: 71-84 years) and 25% were women. Left ventricular ejection fraction was reduced (<50%) in 197 (92.1%) patients. Severe AS was diagnosed in 106 patients (49.5%). Moderate AS was diagnosed in 108 patients (50.5%; in 77 based on resting transthoracic echocardiography, in 31 confirmed using DSE). AVC score was high (≥2,000 for men or ≥1,200 for women) in 47 (44.3%) patients with severe AS and in 47 (43.5%) patients with moderate AS. AVC sensitivity was 44.3%, specificity was 56.5%, and positive and negative predictive values for severe AS were 50.0% and 50.8%, respectively. Area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve was 0.508 for men and 0.524 for women.

CONCLUSIONS

Multi-slice computed tomography-derived AVC scores showed poor discrimination between grades of AS severity using DSE and cannot replace DSE in the diagnostic work-up of low-gradient severe AS.

Impact of Stress Echocardiography on Aortic Valve Stenosis Management

Rest and stress echocardiography (SE) play a fundamental role in the evaluation of aortic valve stenosis (AS). According to the current guidelines for the echocardiographic evaluation of patients with aortic stenosis, four broad categories can be defined: high-gradient AS (mean gradient ≥ 40 mmHg, peak velocity ≥ 4 m/s, aortic valve area (AVA) ≤ 1 cm2 or indexed AVA ≤ 0.6 cm2/m2); low-flow, low-gradient AS with reduced ejection fraction (mean gradient < 40 mmHg, AVA ≤ 1 cm2, left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50%, stroke volume index (Svi) ≤ 35 mL/m2); low-flow, low-gradient AS with preserved ejection fraction (mean gradient < 40 mmHg, AVA ≤ 1 cm2, LVEF ≥ 50%, SVi ≤ 35 mL/m2); and normal-flow, low-gradient AS with preserved ejection fraction (mean gradient < 40 mmHg, AVA ≤ 1 cm2, indexed AVA ≤ 0.6 cm2/m2, LVEF ≥ 50%, SVi > 35 mL/m2). Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is indicated with the onset of symptoms development or LVEF reduction. However, there is often mismatch between resting transthoracic echocardiography findings and patient's symptoms. In these discordant cases, SE and CT calcium scoring are among the indicated methods to guide the management decision making. Additionally, due to the increasing evidence that in asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis an early AVR instead of conservative treatment is associated with better outcomes, SE can help identify those that would benefit from an early AVR by revealing markers of poor prognosis. Low-flow, low-gradient AS represents a challenge both in diagnosis and in therapeutic management. Low-dose dobutamine SE is the recommended method to distinguish true-severe from pseudo-severe stenosis and assess the existence of flow (contractile) reserve to appropriately guide the need for intervention in these patients.

Unraveling the Enigma of Moderate Aortic Stenosis: Challenges and Future Prospects

According to current guidelines, only clinical surveillance is recommended for patients with moderate aortic valve stenosis (AS), while aortic valve replacement may be considered in patients undergoing surgery for other indications. Recent studies have shown that moderate AS is associated with a high risk of adverse cardiovascular events, including death, especially in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. In this context, multimodality imaging can help to improve the accuracy of moderate AS diagnosis and to assess left ventricular remodeling response. This review discusses the natural history of this valve disease and the role of multimodality imaging in the diagnostic process, summarizes current evidence on the medical and non-medical management, and highlights ongoing trials on valve replacement.

Diagnostic Challenges in Aortic Stenosis

Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most prevalent degenerative valvular disease in western countries. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is considered, nowadays, to be the main imaging technique for the work-up of AS due to high availability, safety, low cost, and excellent capacity to evaluate aortic valve (AV) morphology and function. Despite the diagnosis of AS being considered straightforward for a very long time, based on high gradients and reduced aortic valve area (AVA), many patients with AS represent a real dilemma for cardiologist. On the one hand, the acoustic window may be inadequate and the TTE limited in some cases. On the other hand, a growing body of evidence shows that patients with low gradients (due to systolic dysfunction, concentric hypertrophy or coexistence of another valve disease such as mitral stenosis or regurgitation) may develop severe AS (low-flow low-gradient severe AS) with a similar or even worse prognosis. The use of complementary imaging techniques such as transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), multidetector computed tomography (MDTC), or cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) plays a key role in such scenarios. The aim of this review is to summarize the diagnostic challenges associated with patients with AS and the advantages of a comprehensive multimodality cardiac imaging (MCI) approach to reach a precise grading of the disease, a crucial factor to warrant an adequate management of patients.

Prevalence and Outcomes of Patients With Discordant High-Gradient Aortic Stenosis

BACKGROUND

Conflicting prognostic results have been reported in patients with discordant high-gradient aortic stenosis ([DHG-AS] the combination of a mean pressure gradient ≥40 mm Hg and an aortic valve area [AVA] >1 cm2). Moreover, existing studies only included selected patients without concomitant aortic regurgitation.

OBJECTIVES

The authors assessed the prevalence and survival of patients presenting with DHG-AS in an unselected group of consecutive patients presenting to the echocardiography laboratory of a tertiary referral center.

METHODS

A total of 3,547 adult patients with AVA ≤1.5 cm2 and peak aortic jet velocity ≥2.5 m/s or mean gradient ≥25 mm Hg who presented between 2005 and 2015 were included. Baseline clinical and echocardiographic data, and, when available, aortic valve calcium (AVC) score were collected in an institutional database, with subsequent retrospective analysis. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality during follow-up.

RESULTS

DHG-AS was observed in 163 patients (11.6% of patients with a high gradient). After adjustment for potential confounders, overall mortality rate of patients with DHG-AS was similar to that of patients with concordant severe aortic stenosis (HR: 0.98 [95% CI: 0.66-1.44]; P = 0.91), and patients with discordant low-gradient aortic stenosis (HR: 0.85 [95% CI: 0.58-1.26]; P = 0.42), and higher than concordant moderate aortic stenosis (HR: 0.54 [95% CI: 0.36-0.81]; P = 0.003). After adjustment for aortic velocities, aortic regurgitation had no significant impact on survival. AVC was higher than in patients with concordant moderate aortic stenosis and discordant low-gradient aortic stenosis, and not significantly different from that of concordant severe aortic stenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

DHG-AS is not uncommon. Whereas AVA >1.0 cm2 is often seen as moderate aortic stenosis, a high-pressure gradient conveys a poor prognosis, whatever the AVA and the severity of concomitant aortic regurgitation.

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.

Evaluation and Management of Sudden Death Risk in Repaired Tetralogy of Fallot

Although substantial progress has been made to prevent sudden cardiac death in repaired tetralogy of Fallot patients, ventricular arrhythmia and sudden death continue to be major causes of morbidity and mortality in these patients. Greater survival in contemporary cohorts has been attributed to enhanced surgical techniques, more effective management of heart failure, and increased efforts in risk stratification and management of ventricular arrhythmias. More recently, our understanding of predictive risk factors has evolved into personalized risk prediction tools that rely on comprehensive demographic, imaging, functional, and electrophysiological data. However, the universal applicability of these different scoring systems is limited due to differences between study cohorts, types of anatomic repair, imaging modalities, and disease complexity. Noninvasive risk stratification is critical to identify those who may derive benefit from catheter ablation or cardioverter defibrillator implantation for primary prevention. Ultimately, assessment and risk stratification by a multidisciplinary team is crucial to analyze the various complex factors for every individual patient and discuss further options with patients and their families.

Echocardiographic Evaluation of Aortic Stenosis: A Comprehensive Review

Echocardiography represents the most important diagnostic tool in the evaluation of aortic stenosis. The echocardiographic assessment of its severity should always be performed through a standardized and stepwise approach in order to achieve a comprehensive evaluation. The latest technical innovations in the field of echocardiography have improved diagnostic accuracy, guaranteeing a better and more detailed evaluation of aortic valve anatomy. An early diagnosis is of utmost importance since it shortens treatment delays and improves patient outcomes. Echocardiography plays a key role also in the evaluation of all the structural changes related to aortic stenosis. Detailed evaluation of subtle and subclinical changes in left ventricle function has a prognostic significance: scientific efforts have been addressed to identify the most accurate global longitudinal strain cut-off value able to predict adverse outcomes. Moreover, in recent years the role of artificial intelligence is increasingly emerging as a promising tool able to assist cardiologists in aortic stenosis screening and diagnosis, especially by reducing the rate of aortic stenosis misdiagnosis.

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.

The diagnostic role of "acceleration time" measurement in patients with classical low flow low gradient aortic stenosis with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction

PURPOSE

In our study, we aimed to assess the role of acceleration time (AT), ejection time (ET), and AT/ET ratio to distinguish between true and pseudo severe AS in patients with classical low flow-low gradient (LF-LG) aortic stenosis (AS) with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

METHODS

Sixty-seven classical LF-LG AS with reduced LVEF patients who underwent dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) were included in the study. According to DSE results, all patients were divided into two groups; true AS and pseudo severe AS. Aortic valve calcium score was measured in patients with inconclusive DSE results. AT and other ejection dynamics (ET and AT/ET) were calculated by taking baseline echocardiographic records into account for all patients. The predictive power of AT and other ejection dynamics were evaluated to estimate true and pseudo severe AS.

RESULTS

According to DSE results, out of 67 patients, 44 (65.7%) was diagnosed as true severe AS. There was a statistically significant relation between baseline AT and true AS [adjusted OR 4.47 (95% CI 1.93-10.4), p = 0.001]. The best cutoff value of AT was measured as 100 msec according to the Youden index. This value had a sensitivity value of 77%, specificity value of 87%, positive predictive value of 92%, and a negative predictive value of 67%.

CONCLUSION

The measurement of AT can predict the DSE outcome and can be used for diagnostic purposes to distinguish between true and pseudo severe AS in classical LF-LG AS patients with reduced LVEF.

Impact of Concomitant Mitral Regurgitation on the Hemodynamic Indicators of Aortic Stenosis

Background In patients with aortic stenosis (AS), the presence of mitral regurgitation (MR) can lead to underestimation of AS severity and worse clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to characterize the magnitude of the effects of concomitant MR on hemodynamic indicators of AS severity using clinical data and a computational cardiovascular simulation. Methods and Results Echocardiographic data from 1427 patients with severe AS were used to inform a computational cardiovascular system model, and varying degrees of MR and AS were simulated. Hemodynamic data, including left ventricular and aortic pressure waveforms, were generated for all simulations. Simulated reduction in mean transaortic pressure gradient (MPG) associated with MR was then used to calculate the adjusted MPG in the clinical cohort. MR was present in 861 (60%) patients. Compared with patients without MR, patients with MR had a lower aortic-valve area (0.83±0.2 cm2 versus 0.75±0.2; P<0.001) and were more likely to have a low-gradient pattern (MPG <40 mm Hg) (45% versus 54%; P<0.001). Simulations showed that the presence of concomitant mild, moderate, and severe MR with AS was accompanied by a mean reduction in MPG of 10%, 29%, and 40%, respectively. For patients with MR, their calculated adjusted MPG was on average 24% higher than their MPG (52±22 versus 42±16 mm Hg). Of the 467 patients with low-gradient AS and MR, 240 (51%) would reclassify as high gradient based on their adjusted MPG. Conclusions Concomitant MR results in lower MPG and reduced forward flow compared with isolated AS. Careful quantitation of MR should be factored into the assessment of AS severity to mitigate for potential underestimation.

Evidence for a sigmoidal flow-to-valve opening relation in low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis

We analyzed the relationship between flow (Q) and aortic valve opening area (AVA) using a sequence of echocardiographic stress tests of increasing strength. Low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) has been used to differentiate pseudo-severe from true severe aortic stenoses. Because the Q-response to DSE is so variable between individuals, AVA has been projected to a standardized flow (AVA_proj) using linear interpolation. A linear Q-to-AVA relation implies that AVA shows an unconstrained increase. We applied three stress maneuvers of increasing strength to investigate whether AVA shows signs of saturation. We performed an echocardiographic examination at rest, during the passive leg raise maneuver ("PLR"), maximal dobutamine infusion ("Dmax"), and their combination ("Dmax + PLR") in 45 patients with severe low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis. We analyzed the effect of the stress maneuver on Q, AVA, valve compliance (VC), and AVA_proj. We also compared the proportion of patients with nonconclusive test (ΔQ < 20%) between stress maneuvers. We computed the Akaike information criterion (AIC) to compare a linear with a saturating function for the Q-AVA relation. Q gradually increased from "PLR" to "Dmax" to "Dmax + PLR" (P < 0.0001), whereas the number of nonconclusive tests concomitantly diminished from n = 35 to n = 3. The stress sequence increased AVA (P < 0.001) but decreased AVA_proj (P = 0.006) and VC (P = 0.005). In the pooled Q-AVA data, the AIC value was lower for the saturating (sigmoidal) model compared with the linear model fitting (-1,593 vs. -1,504). "Dmax + PLR" is capable of reducing the number of nonconclusive DSE tests. With increasing stress strength, the Q-AVA relation progressively flattens, indicating saturation.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The relation between transaortic flow (Q) and aortic valve opening area (AVA) shows a saturation when three different stress maneuvers are used to increase Q as much as possible. This has implications for the assessment of aortic stenosis severity.

Managing Patients With Moderate Aortic Stenosis

Current guidelines recommend that clinical surveillance for patients with moderate aortic stenosis (AS) and aortic valve replacement (AVR) may be considered if there is an indication for coronary revascularization. Recent observational studies, however, have shown that moderate AS is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and mortality. Whether the increased risk of adverse events is caused by associated comorbidities, or to the underlying moderate AS itself, is incompletely understood. Similarly, which patients with moderate AS need close follow-up or could potentially benefit from early AVR is also unknown. In this review, the authors provide a comprehensive overview of the current literature on moderate AS. They first provide an algorithm that helps to diagnose moderate AS correctly, especially when discordant grading is observed. Although the traditional focus of AS assessment has been on the valve, it is increasingly acknowledged that AS is not only a disease of the aortic valve but also of the ventricle. The authors therefore discuss how multimodality imaging can help to evaluate the left ventricular remodeling response and improve risk stratification in patients with moderate AS. Finally, they summarize current evidence on the management of moderate AS and highlight ongoing trials on AVR in moderate AS.

Multimodality Imaging to Explore Sex Differences in Aortic Stenosis

The aim of this article is to review sex differences in aortic stenosis (AS) assessed with multimodality imaging. Echocardiography remains the mainstay imaging technique to diagnose AS and provides important insights into the differences between men and women in relation to valve haemodynamic and left-ventricular response. However, echocardiography does not have adequate resolution to provide important insights into sex differences in the degenerative, calcific pathophysiological process of the aortic valve. CT shows that women with AS have more fibrotic changes of the aortic valve whereas men show more calcific deposits. Cardiac magnetic resonance shows that women have left ventricles that are less hypertrophic and smaller compared with those of men, while men have more replacement myocardial fibrosis. These differences may lead to different responses to aortic valve replacement because myocardial diffuse fibrosis but not replacement myocardial fibrosis may regress after the procedure. Sex differences in the pathophysiological process of AS can be assessed using multimodality imaging, assisting in decisionmaking in these patients.

Comprehensive myocardial characterization using cardiac magnetic resonance associates with outcomes in low gradient severe aortic stenosis

AIMS

This study sought to compare cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) characteristics according to different flow/gradient patterns of aortic stenosis (AS) and to evaluate their prognostic value in patients with low-gradient AS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This international prospective multicentric study included 147 patients with low-gradient moderate to severe AS who underwent comprehensive CMR evaluation of left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVGLS), extracellular volume fraction (ECV), and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). All patients were classified as followings: classical low-flow low-gradient (LFLG) [mean gradient (MG) < 40 mmHg and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50%]; paradoxical LFLG [MG < 40 mmHg, LVEF ≥ 50%, and stroke volume index (SVi) < 35 ml/m2]; and normal-flow low-gradient (MG < 40 mmHg, LVEF ≥ 50%, and SVi ≥ 35 ml/m2). Patients with classical LFLG (n = 90) had more LV adverse remodelling including higher ECV, and higher LGE and volume, and worst LVGLS. Over a median follow-up of 2 years, 43 deaths and 48 composite outcomes of death or heart failure hospitalizations occurred. Risks of adverse events increased per tertile of LVGLS: hazard ratio (HR) = 1.50 [95% CI, 1.02-2.20]; P = 0.04 for mortality; HR = 1.45 [1.01-2.09]; P < 0.05 for composite outcome; per tertile of ECV, HR = 1.63 [1.07-2.49]; P = 0.02 for mortality; HR = 1.54 [1.02-2.33]; P = 0.04 for composite outcome. LGE presence also associated with higher mortality, HR = 2.27 [1.01-5.11]; P < 0.05 and composite outcome, HR = 3.00 [1.16-7.73]; P = 0.02. The risk of mortality and the composite outcome increased in proportion to the number of impaired components (i.e. LVGLS, ECV, and LGE) with multivariate adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

In this international prospective multicentric study of low-gradient AS, comprehensive CMR assessment provides independent prognostic value that is cumulative and incremental to clinical and echocardiographic characteristics.

Hemodynamic changes during aortic valve surgery among patients with aortic stenosis

Introduction. Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing surgery are at increased risk of hypotension and hypoperfusion. Although treatable with inotropic agents or fluid, little is known about how these therapies affect central hemodynamics in AS patients under general anesthesia. We measured changes in central hemodynamics after dobutamine infusion and fluid bolus among patients with severe AS and associated these changes with preoperative echocardiography. Methods. We included 33 patients with severe AS undergoing surgical AVR. After induction of general anesthesia, hemodynamic measurements were obtained with a pulmonary artery catheter, including Cardiac index (CI), stroke volume index (SVi) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP). Measurements were repeated during dobutamine infusion, after fluid bolus and lastly after sternotomy. Results. General anesthesia resulted in a decrease in CI and SVi compared to preoperative values. During dobutamine infusion CI increased but mean SVi did not (38 ± 12 vs 37 ± 13 ml/m², p = .90). Higher EF and SVi before surgery and a larger decrease in SVi after induction of general anesthesia were associated with an increase in SVi during dobutamine infusion. After fluid bolus both CI, SVi (48 ± 12 vs 37 ± 13 ml/min/m², p < .0001) and PCWP increased. PCWP increased mostly among patients with a larger LA volume index. Conclusion. In patients with AS, CI can be increased with both dobutamine and fluid during surgery. Dobutamine's effect on SVI was highly variable and associated with baseline LVEF, and an increase in CI was mostly driven by an increase in heart rate. Fluid increased SVi at the cost of an increase in PCWP.

Sigmoid isostiffness-lines: An in-vitro model for the assessment of aortic stenosis severity

Introduction

The aortic valve opening area (AVA), used to quantify aortic stenosis severity, depends on the transvalvular flow rate (Q). The currently accepted clinical echocardiographic method assumes a linear relation between AVA and Q. We studied whether a sigmoid model better describes this relation and determined "isostiffness-lines" across a wide flow spectrum, thus allowing building a nomogram for the non-invasive estimation of valve stiffness.

Methods

Both AVA and instantaneous Q (Qinst) were measured at 10 different mean cardiac outputs of porcine aortic valves mounted in a pulsatile flow loop. The valves' cusps were chemically stiffened to obtain three stiffness grades and the procedure was repeated for each grade. The relative stiffness was defined as the ratio between LV work at grade with the added stiffness and at native stiffness grade.AVA peak ¯ corresponding to the selectedQ peak ¯ of the highest 3 and 5 cardiac output values was predicted in K-fold cross-validation using sequentially a linear and a sigmoid model. The accuracy of each model was assessed with the Akaike information criterion (AIC).

Results

The sigmoid model predicted more accuratelyAVA peak ¯ (AIC for prediction of AVA withQ peak ¯ of the 3 highest cardiac output values: -1,743 vs. -1,048; 5 highest cardiac output values: -1,471 vs. -878) than the linear model.

Conclusion

This study suggests that the relation between AVA and Q can be better described by a sigmoid than a linear model. This construction of "isostiffness-lines" may be a useful method for the assessment of aortic stenosis in clinical echocardiography.

Severe Aortic Stenosis: More Than an Imaging Diagnosis

The definition of severe aortic stenosis has undergone significant change casting a wider net to avoid missing patients who could benefit from valve replacement. The presence or absence of symptoms remains the key decision-making element; however, individuals presently undergoing evaluation are older, more likely asymptomatic, and have lower gradients. Due to numerous potential measurement errors, attention to detail when performing diagnostic testing and understanding their limitations are necessary to render appropriate treatment. Exercise testing adds useful information for individuals with severe aortic stenosis felt to be asymptomatic. Dobutamine echocardiography, in low flow-low gradient aortic stenosis, distinguishes between a myopathic and valvular cause of left ventricular dysfunction. Evaluation of patients when normotensive minimizes measurement errors. The amount of aortic valve calcification adds useful information when the degree of aortic stenosis is uncertain. A good history and physical integrated with high-quality imaging data allows for appropriate clinical treatment decisions for patients with aortic stenosis. The goal is simultaneously to provide aortic valve replacement for patients in need while avoiding overdiagnosis and performance of unnecessary procedures.

Trends in Utilization of Aortic Valve Replacement for Severe Aortic Stenosis

BACKGROUND

Despite the rapid growth of aortic valve replacement (AVR) for aortic stenosis (AS), limited data suggest symptomatic severe AS remains undertreated.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to investigate temporal trends in AVR utilization among patients with a clinical indication for AVR.

METHODS

Patients with severe AS (aortic valve area <1 cm²) on transthoracic echocardiograms from 2000 to 2017 at 2 large academic medical centers were classified based on clinical guideline indications for AVR and divided into 4 AS subgroups: high gradient with normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (HG-NEF), high gradient with low LVEF (HG-LEF), low gradient with normal LVEF (LG-NEF), and low gradient with low LVEF (LG-LEF). Utilization of AVR was examined and predictors identified.

RESULTS

Of 10,795 patients, 6,150 (57%) had an indication or potential indication for AVR, of whom 2,977 (48%) received AVR. The frequency of AVR varied by AS subtype with LG groups less likely to receive an AVR (HG-NEF: 70%, HG-LEF: 53%, LG-NEF: 32%, LG-LEF: 38%, P < 0.001). AVR volumes grew over the 18-year study period but were paralleled by comparable growth in the number of patients with an indication for AVR. In patients with a Class I indication, younger age, coronary artery disease, smoking history, higher hematocrit, outpatient index transthoracic echocardiogram, and LVEF ≥0.5 were independently associated with an increased likelihood of receiving an AVR. AVR was associated with improved survival in each AS-subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Over an 18-year period, the proportion of patients with an indication for AVR who did not receive AVR has remained substantial despite the rapid growth of AVR volumes.

How to deal with low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis and reduced left ventricle ejection fraction: from literature review to tips for clinical practice

Low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis (LFLG AS) with reduced left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) is still a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. The aim of this paper is to review the latest evidences about the assessment of the valvular disease, usually difficult because of the low-flow status, and the therapeutic options. Special emphasis is given to the available diagnostic tools for the characterization of LFLG AS without functional reserve at stress echocardiography and to the factors that clinicians should evaluate to choose between surgical aortic valve repair, transcatheter aortic valve implantation, or medical therapy.

Scale-Resolving Simulations of Steady and Pulsatile Flow Through Healthy and Stenotic Heart Valves

Blood-flow downstream of stenotic and healthy aortic valves exhibits intermittent random fluctuations in the velocity field which are associated with turbulence. Such flows warrant the use of computationally demanding scale-resolving models. The aim of this work was to compute and quantify this turbulent flow in healthy and stenotic heart valves for steady and pulsatile flow conditions. Large eddy simulations (LESs) and Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) simulations were used to compute the flow field at inlet Reynolds numbers of 2700 and 5400 for valves with an opening area of 70 mm2 and 175 mm2 and their projected orifice-plate type counterparts. Power spectra and turbulent kinetic energy were quantified on the centerline. Projected geometries exhibited an increased pressure-drop (>90%) and elevated turbulent kinetic energy levels (>147%). Turbulence production was an order of magnitude higher in stenotic heart valves compared to healthy valves. Pulsatile flow stabilizes flow in the acceleration phase, whereas onset of deceleration triggered (healthy valve) or amplified (stenotic valve) turbulence. Simplification of the aortic valve by projecting the orifice area should be avoided in computational fluid dynamics (CFD). RANS simulations may be used to predict the transvalvular pressure-drop, but scale-resolving models are recommended when detailed information of the flow field is required.

Futility in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Search for Clarity

Although transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has revolutionised the landscape of treatment for aortic stenosis, there exists a cohort of patients where TAVI is deemed futile. Among the pivotal high-risk trials, one-third to half of patients either died or received no symptomatic benefit from the procedure at 1 year. Futility of TAVI results in the unnecessary exposure of risk for patients and inefficient resource utilisation for healthcare services. Several cardiac and extra-cardiac conditions and frailty increase the risk of mortality despite TAVI. Among the survivors, these comorbidities can inhibit improvements in symptoms and quality of life. However, certain conditions are reversible with TAVI (e.g. functional mitral regurgitation), attenuating the risk and improving outcomes. Quantification of disease severity, identification of reversible factors and a systematic evaluation of frailty can substantially improve risk stratification and outcomes. This review examines the contribution of pre-existing comorbidities towards futility in TAVI and suggests a systematic approach to guide patient evaluation.

Multimodality imaging in aortic stenosis

Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common cardiac valve lesion in the adult population, with an incidence increasing as the population ages. Accurate assessment of AS severity is necessary for clinical decision-making. Echocardiography is currently the diagnostic method of choice for assessing and managing AS. Transthoracic echocardiography is usually sufficient in most situations. Transesophageal echocardiography and stress echocardiography may also be utilized when there is inadequate image quality and/or discordance in the results and the clinical presentation. There is a role for other imaging modalities such as cardiac computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and catheterization in selected cases. The following describes in some detail the role of these modalities in the diagnosis and assessment of AS.

Valvulo-Arterial Impedance and Dimensionless Index for Risk Stratifying Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis

The hemodynamic effects of aortic stenosis (AS) consist of increased left ventricular (LV) afterload, reduced myocardial compliance, and increased myocardial workload. The LV in AS patients faces a double load: valvular and arterial loads. As such, the presence of symptoms and occurrence of adverse events in AS should better correlate with calculating the global burden faced by the LV in addition to the transvalvular gradient and aortic valve area (AVA). The valvulo-arterial impedance (Zva) is a useful parameter providing an estimate of the global LV hemodynamic load that results from the summation of the valvular and vascular loads. In addition to calculating the global LV afterload, it is paramount to estimate the stenosis severity accurately. In clinical practice, the management of low-flow low-gradient (LF-LG) severe AS with preserved LV ejection fraction requires careful confirmation of stenosis severity. In addition to the Zva, the dimensionless index (DI) is a very useful parameter to express the size of the effective valvular area as a proportion of the cross-section area of the left ventricular outlet tract velocity-time integral (LVOT-VTI) to that of the aortic valve jet (dimensionless velocity ratio). The DI is calculated by a ratio of the sub-valvular velocity obtained by pulsed-wave Doppler (LVOT-VTI) divided by the maximum velocity obtained by continuous-wave Doppler across the aortic valve (AV-VTI). In contrast to AVA measurement, the DI does not require the calculation of LVOT cross-sectional area, a major cause of erroneous assessment and underestimation of AVA. Hence, among patients with LG severe AS and preserved LV ejection fraction, calculation of DI in routine echocardiographic practice may be useful to identify a subgroup of patients at higher risk of mortality who may derive benefit from aortic valve replacement. This article aims to elucidate the Zva and DI in different clinical situations, correlate with the standard indexes of AS severity, LV geometry, and function, and thus prove to improve risk stratification and clinical decision making in patients with severe AS.

Clinical Value of Stress Transaortic Flow Rate During Dobutamine Echocardiography in Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Low rest transaortic flow rate (FR) has been shown previously to predict mortality in low-gradient aortic stenosis. However limited prognostic data exists on stress FR during low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography. We aimed to assess the value of stress FR for the detection of aortic valve stenosis (AS) severity and the prediction of mortality.

METHODS

This is a multicenter cohort study of patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and low-gradient aortic stenosis (aortic valve area <1 cm² and mean gradient <40 mm Hg) who underwent low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography to identify the AS severity and presence of flow reserve. The outcome assessed was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 287 patients (mean age, 75±10 years; males, 71%; left ventricular ejection fraction, 31±10%) over a mean follow-up of 24±30 months there were 127 (44.3%) deaths and 147 (51.2%) patients underwent aortic valve intervention. Higher stress FR was independently associated with reduced risk of mortality (hazard ratio, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.94-0.99]; P=0.01) after adjusting for age, chronic kidney disease, heart failure symptoms, aortic valve intervention, and rest left ventricular ejection fraction. The minimum cutoff for prediction of mortality was stress FR 210 mL/s. Following adjustment to the same important clinical and echocardiographic parameters, among the three criteria of AS severity during stress, ie, the guideline definition of aortic valve area <1cm² and aortic valve mean gradient ≥40 mm Hg, or aortic valve mean gradient ≥40 mm Hg, or the novel definition of aortic valve area <1 cm² at stress FR ≥210 mL/s, only the latter was independently associated with mortality (hazard ratio, 1.72 [95% CI, 1.05-2.82]; P=0.03). Furthermore aortic valve area <1cm² at stress FR ≥210 mL/s was the only severe aortic stenosis criterion that was associated with improved outcome following aortic valve intervention (P<0.001). Guideline-defined stroke volume flow reserve did not predict mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Stress FR during low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography was useful for the detection of both AS severity and flow reserve and was associated with improved prediction of outcome following aortic valve intervention.

Diagnostic Work-Up of the Aortic Patient: An Integrated Approach toward the Best Therapeutic Option

Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular heart disease. In the last decade, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the standard of care for symptomatic patients at high surgical risk. Recently, indications to TAVI have also been extended to the low surgical risk and intermediate surgical risk populations. Consequently, in this setting, some aspects acquire greater relevance: surgical risk evaluation, clinical assessment, multimodality imaging of the valve, and management of coronary artery disease. Moreover, future issues such as coronary artery re-access and valve-in-valve interventions should be considered in the valve selection process. This review aims to summarize the principal aspects of a multidimensional (multidisciplinary) and comprehensive preprocedural work-up. The Heart Team is at the center of the decision-making process of the management of aortic valve disease and bears responsibility for offering each patient a tailored approach based on an individual evaluation of technical aspects together with the risks and benefits of each modality. Considering the progressive expansion in TAVI indication and technological progress, the role of a work-up and multidisciplinary Heart Team will be even more relevant.

Resting echocardiographic predictors for true-severe aortic stenosis in patients with low-gradient severe aortic stenosis: A dobutamine stress echocardiography study

OBJECTIVE

Dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) is not always feasible in patients with low-gradient severe aortic stenosis (LG-SAS), and there are limited data available on the resting echocardiographic predictors for true-severe aortic stenosis (TSAS). This study investigated resting echocardiographic predictors for TSAS.

METHODS

Clinical data of 106 LG-SAS patients who underwent DSE were retrospectively analyzed. LG-SAS was defined as an aortic valve area index (AVAi) < .6 cm² /m² , and a mean AV pressure gradient < 40 mm Hg. The velocity ratio (VR) was calculated as the peak left ventricular outflow tract velocity/peak AV velocity. TSAS was defined as a projected AVAi < .6 cm² /m² .

RESULTS

The mean age was 79.3 ± 7.3 years, and 45 (42.5%) were men. The resting AV data were as follows: AVAi, .50 ± .07 cm² /m² ; mean AV pressure gradient, 23.0 ± 7.4 mm Hg; and VR, .25 ± .05. The projected AVAi was .58 ± .09 cm² /m² , and TSAS was documented in 65 (61.3%) patients. In multivariate analysis, the independent predictors of TSAS were AVAi (p = 0.012) and VR (p = 0.004) with respective best cut-off values of .52 cm² /m² and .25 on receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis. According to incremental numbers of the predictors, correct classification percentages of TSAS significantly increased with the Cochran-Armitage trend test (16.2% in no predictors, 65.2% in one predictor, and 95.7 % in two predictors; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Resting AVAi and VR were independent predictors of TSAS in LG-SAS patients. The true severity might be predictable using the combination of resting parameters.

Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Valve Stenosis: The Role of Non-Invasive Imaging

Aortic stenosis is the most common heart valve disease necessitating surgical or percutaneous intervention. Imaging has a central role for the initial diagnostic work-up, the follow-up and the selection of the optimal timing and type of intervention. Referral for aortic valve replacement is currently driven by the severity and by the presence of aortic stenosis-related symptoms or signs of left ventricular systolic dysfunction. This review aims to provide an update of the imaging techniques and seeks to highlight a practical approach to help clinical decision making.

Management of aortic stenosis: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and recommendations

Multiple guidelines exist for the management of aortic stenosis (AS). We systematically reviewed current guidelines and recommendations, developed by national or international medical organizations, on management of AS to aid clinical decision-making. Publications in MEDLINE and EMBASE between 1 June 2010 and 15 January 2021 were identified. Additionally, the International Guideline Library, National Guideline Clearinghouse, National Library for Health Guidelines Finder, Canadian Medical Association Clinical Practice Guidelines Infobase, and websites of relevant organizations were searched. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts. Two reviewers assessed rigour of guideline development and extracted the recommendations. Of the seven guidelines and recommendations retrieved, five showed considerable rigour of development. Those rigourously developed, agreed on the definition of severe AS and diverse haemodynamic phenotypes, indications and contraindications for intervention in symptomatic severe AS, surveillance intervals in asymptomatic severe AS, and the importance of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) and shared decision-making. Discrepancies exist in age and surgical risk cut-offs for recommending surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) vs. transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), the use of biomarkers and complementary multimodality imaging for decision-making in asymptomatic patients and surveillance intervals for non-severe AS. Contemporary guidelines for AS management agree on the importance of MDT involvement and shared decision-making for individualized treatment and unanimously indicate valve replacement in severe, symptomatic AS. Discrepancies exist in thresholds for age and procedural risk used in choosing between SAVR and TAVI, role of biomarkers and complementary imaging modalities to define AS severity and risk of progression in asymptomatic patients.

Low Relative Valve Load is Associated With Paradoxical Low-Flow Aortic Stenosis Despite Preserved Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Adverse Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Paradoxical low-flow (LF) severe aortic stenosis (AS) despite preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) has been shown to be distinct from normal-flow (NF) AS, with a poorer prognosis. Relative valve load (RVL) is a novel echocardiographic haemodynamic index based on the ratio of transaortic mean pressure gradient to the global valvulo-arterial impedance (Zva) in order to estimate the contribution of the valvular afterload to the global LV load. We aimed to determine the usefulness of RVL in LF AS versus NF AS.

METHOD

A total of 450 consecutive patients with medically managed severe AS (aortic valve area <1.0 cm²) with preserved LVEF (>50%) were studied. Patients were divided into LF (stroke volume index <35 mL/m²) or NF, and high RVL or low RVL. Baseline clinical and echocardiographic profiles, as well as clinical outcomes, were compared.

RESULTS

There were 149 (33.1%) patients with LF. Despite higher global impedance in LF (Zva 6.3±2.4 vs 3.9±0.9 mmHg/mL/m²; p<0.001) compared with NF, the RVL in LF AS was significantly lower (5.4±2.7 vs 9.8±5.1 mL/m²; p<0.001). On multivariable analysis, low RVL (≤7.51) remained independently associated with poor clinical outcomes on Cox regression (hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.68), with 53.2% sensitivity and 70.3% specificity. This was comparable to other prognostic indices in AS. Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated that low RVL was associated with increased mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased systemic arterial afterload may be important in the pathophysiology of LF AS. Low RVL was an independent predictor of poor clinical outcomes in medically managed severe AS. There may be a greater role in the attenuation of systemic arterial afterload in AS to improve outcomes.

Evaluation and Management of Aortic Stenosis in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Aortic stenosis with concomitant chronic kidney disease (CKD) represents a clinical challenge. Aortic stenosis is more prevalent and progresses more rapidly and unpredictably in CKD, and the presence of CKD is associated with worse short-term and long-term outcomes after aortic valve replacement. Because patients with advanced CKD and end-stage kidney disease have been excluded from randomized trials, clinicians need to make complex management decisions in this population that are based on retrospective and observational evidence. This statement summarizes the epidemiological and pathophysiological characteristics of aortic stenosis in the context of CKD, evaluates the nuances and prognostic information provided by noninvasive cardiovascular imaging with echocardiography and advanced imaging techniques, and outlines the special risks in this population. Furthermore, this statement provides a critical review of the existing literature pertaining to clinical outcomes of surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement in this high-risk population to help guide clinical decision making in the choice of aortic valve replacement and specific prosthesis. Finally, this statement provides an approach to the perioperative management of these patients, with special attention to a multidisciplinary heart-kidney collaborative team-based approach.

Echocardiographic assessment of aortic stenosis: a practical guideline from the British Society of Echocardiography

The guideline provides a practical step-by-step guide in order to facilitate high-quality echocardiographic studies of patients with aortic stenosis. In addition, it addresses commonly encountered yet challenging clinical scenarios and covers the use of advanced echocardiographic techniques, including TOE and Dobutamine stress echocardiography in the assessment of aortic stenosis.

At what flow rate does the aortic valve gradient become severely elevated? Implications for guideline recommendations on aortic valve area cutoffs

Introduction

Aortic stenosis (AS) is considered severe when the aortic valve area (AVA) is < 1.0 cm2 and the mean aortic valve gradient (mAVG) exceeds 40 mm Hg. Since many patients with AVA < 1.0 cm2 do not manifest an mAVG > 40 mm Hg, we sought to determine the AVA at which mAVG tends to exceed 40 mm Hg in a sample of subjects with varied transvalvular flow rates.

Material and methods

Our echocardiography database was queried for subjects with native valve AS. We selected 200 subjects with an AVA < 1.0 cm2. The sample was selected to include subjects with varied mean systolic flow (MSF) rates. Linear regression was performed to determine the relationship between MSF and mAVG. Since this relationship varied by AVA, the regression was stratified by AVA (critical < 0.6 cm2, severe 0.6-0.79 cm2, moderately severe 0.8-0.99 cm2).

Results

The study sample was 79 ±12 years old and was 60% female. The MSF rate at which mAVG tended to exceed 40 mm Hg was 120 ml/s for critical AVA, 183 ml/s for severe AVA and 257 ml/s for moderately severe AVA. Those with moderately severe AVA rarely (8%) had an mAVG > 40 mm Hg at a wide range of MSF. In contrast, those with severe AVA typically (75%) had mAVG > 40 mm Hg when MSF was normal (> 200 ml/s). Those with critical AVA frequently (44%) had mAVG > 40 mm Hg, even when MSF was reduced.

Conclusions

Subjects with AVA of 0.8 and 0.9 cm2 rarely had mAVG > 40 mm Hg, even when the transvalvular flow rate was normal. Using current guidelines, it is not clear if such cases should be classified as severe.

Predictors of true-severe classical low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis at resting echocardiography

BACKGROUND

Classical low-flow, low-gradient (LF/LG) aortic stenosis (AS) is subclassified into a true-severe (TS) and a pseudo-severe (PS) subform using low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE). In clinical practice a resting peak jet velocity (Vmax) >3.5 m/s or a mean transvalvular gradient (MPG) >35 mmHg suggests the presence of TS classical LF/LG AS, but there is no data to support this. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate whether a resting Vmax >3.5 m/s or MPG >35 mmHg reliably predicted diagnosis of TS classical LF/LG AS.

METHODS

One hundred (100) consecutive patients with classical LF/LG AS were prospectively recruited. All patients underwent DSE for subcategorization. The impact of Vmax and MPG for the presence of the TS subform were analyzed.

RESULTS

TS classical LF/LG AS was diagnosed in 72 patients. Resting Vmax and resting MPG predicted true-severity with an ROC-AUC of 0.737 (95%CI: 0.635-0.838; p < 0.001) and 0.725 (95%CI: 0.615-0.834; p < 0.001), respectively. The optimal positive predictive values (PPV) for the diagnosis of TS classical LF/LG AS were obtained with a resting Vmax >3.5 m/s or resting MPG >35 mmHg. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, Vmax >3.5 m/s was independently associated with a 5.33-fold odds-ratio of TS classical LF/LG AS (OR 5.33; 95%CI: 1.34-21.18, p = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

TS classical LF/LG AS can be reliably predicted by a resting Vmax >3.5 m/s or a resting MPG >35 mmHg. Further imaging for subclassification is not needed in this situation.

Transvalvular Flow Rate Determines Prognostic Value of Aortic Valve Area in Aortic Stenosis

BACKGROUND

Aortic valve area (AVA) ≤1.0 cm² is a defining characteristic of severe aortic stenosis (AS). AVA can be underestimated at low transvalvular flow rate. Yet, the impact of flow rate on prognostic value of AVA ≤1.0 cm² is unknown and is not incorporated into AS assessment.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of flow rate on prognostic value of AVA in AS.

METHODS

In total, 1,131 patients with moderate or severe AS and complete clinical follow-up were included as part of a longitudinal database. The effect of flow rate (ratio of stroke volume to ejection time) on prognostic value of AVA ≤1.0 cm² for time to death was evaluated, adjusting for confounders. Sensitivity analysis was performed to identify the optimal cutoff for prognostic threshold of AVA. The findings were validated in a separate external longitudinal cohort of 939 patients.

RESULTS

Flow rate had a significant effect on prognostic value of AVA. AVA ≤1.0 cm² was not prognostic for mortality (p = 0.15) if AVA was measured at flow rates below median (≤242 ml/s). In contrast, AVA ≤1.0 cm² was highly prognostic for mortality (p = 0.003) if AVA was measured at flow rates above median (>242 ml/s). Findings were irrespective of multivariable adjustment for age, sex, and surgical/transcatheter aortic valve replacement (as time-dependent covariates); comorbidities; medications; and echocardiographic features. AVA ≤1.0 cm² was also not an independent predictor of mortality below median flow rate in the validation cohort. The optimal flow rate cutoff for prognostic threshold was 210 ml/s.

CONCLUSIONS

Transvalvular flow rate determines prognostic value of AVA in AS. AVA measured at low flow rate is not a good prognostic marker and therefore not a good diagnostic marker for truly severe AS. Flow rate assessment should be incorporated into clinical diagnosis, classification, and prognosis of AS.

Comparison of Early Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Conservative Management in Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis Using Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting: Results From the TOPAS Prospective Observational Cohort Study

Background No randomized comparison of early (ie, ≤3 months) aortic valve replacement (AVR) versus conservative management or of transcatheter AVR (TAVR) versus surgical AVR has been conducted in patients with low-flow, low-gradient (LFLG) aortic stenosis (AS). Methods and Results A total of 481 consecutive patients (75±10 years; 71% men) with LFLG AS (aortic valve area ≤0.6 cm2/m2 and mean gradient <40 mm Hg), 72% with classic LFLG and 28% with paradoxical LFLG, were prospectively recruited in the multicenter TOPAS (True or Pseudo Severe Aortic Stenosis) study. True-severe AS or pseudo-severe AS was adjudicated by flow-independent criteria. During follow-up (median [IQR] 36 [11-60] months), 220 patients died. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting to address the bias of nonrandom treatment assignment, early AVR (n=272) was associated with a major overall survival benefit (hazard ratio [HR], 0.34 [95% CI, 0.24-0.50]; P<0.001). This benefit was observed in patients with true-severe AS but also with pseudo-severe AS (HR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.18-0.81]; P=0.01), and in classic (HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.22-0.49]; P<0.001) and paradoxical LFLG AS (HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.20-0.92]; P=0.03). Compared with conservative management in the conventional multivariate model, trans femoral TAVR was associated with the best survival (HR, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.12-0.43]; P<0.001), followed by surgical AVR (HR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.23-0.56]; P<0.001) and alternative-access TAVR (HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.31-0.82]; P=0.007). In the inverse probability of treatment weighting model, trans femoral TAVR appeared to be superior to surgical AVR (HR [95% CI] 0.28 [0.11-0.72]; P=0.008) with regard to survival. Conclusions In this large prospective observational study of LFLG AS, early AVR appeared to confer a major survival benefit in both classic and paradoxical LFLG AS. This benefit seems to extend to the subgroup with pseudo-severe AS. Our findings suggest that TAVR using femoral access might be the best strategy in these patients. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01835028.

Multimodality Imaging for Discordant Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis: Assessing the Valve and the Myocardium

Aortic stenosis (AS) is a disease of the valve and the myocardium. A correct assessment of the valve disease severity is key to define the need for aortic valve replacement (AVR), but a better understanding of the myocardial consequences of the increased afterload is paramount to optimize the timing of the intervention. Transthoracic echocardiography remains the cornerstone of AS assessment, as it is universally available, and it allows a comprehensive structural and hemodynamic evaluation of both the aortic valve and the rest of the heart. However, it may not be sufficient as a significant proportion of patients with severe AS presents with discordant grading (i.e., an AVA ≤ 1 cm² and a mean gradient <40 mmHg) which raises uncertainty about the true severity of AS and the need for AVR. Several imaging modalities (transesophageal or stress echocardiography, computed tomography, cardiovascular magnetic resonance, positron emission tomography) exist that allow a detailed assessment of the stenotic aortic valve and the myocardial remodeling response. This review aims to provide an updated overview of these multimodality imaging techniques and seeks to highlight a practical approach to help clinical decision making in the challenging group of patients with discordant low-gradient AS.