Global left ventricular afterload matters in left ventricular reverse remodeling after aortic valve replacement

Objective: Aortic insufficiency (AI) can lead to left ventricular (LV) remodeling characterized by dilation and increased LV mass. This remodeling can cause altered mitral valve coaptation and functional mitral regurgitation (FMR). While there is growing evidence that aortic valve replacement (AVR) for aortic stenosis promotes sufficient ventricular reverse remodeling that FMR improves or resolves, this effect is not well characterized for patients with AI. Methods: All cases of AVR for AI that were performed at a single center between January 2003 and December 2015 were reviewed. Cases with any concomitant procedures, any degree of aortic stenosis, any evidence of ischemic etiology, absence of mitral regurgitation, or significant primary mitral pathology were excluded from analysis. The primary outcome was change in FMR after isolated AVR. Secondary outcomes included change in LV ejection fraction (EF), left atrial (LA) dimension, and change in end-diastolic and –systolic LV dimensions. Two-tailed paired t-test was used to evaluate for difference between the two time points. Results: Over the course of 13.4 years, 31 cases of isolated aortic valve replacement for pure aortic insufficiency with concurrent functional mitral regurgitation were identified. 54.8% (17/31) of cases had some evidence of bacteremia or aortic vegetations at time of surgery, with 41.9% (13/31) of cases completed urgently. Postoperatively, FMR was improved in 74.2% (23/31) of the patients, and decreased by a mean 1.0 ± 0.8 grades (1.6 ± 0.8 vs 0.6 ± 0.7, p < 0.001). There was no significant change in LV EF (50.5 ± 13.4 vs. 50.2 ± 12.9, p = 0.892) or LA dimension (42.5 ± 7.2 vs 40.7 ± 5.9, p = 0.341), but there were significant reductions in the dimension of the LV at end-diastole (56.7 ± 7.1 vs 47.7 ± 8.5, p < 0.001) and end-systole (38.5 ± 9.7 vs 34.0 ± 8.3, p = 0.011). Conclusions: Significant reduction in ventricular size and subsequent improvement in functional mitral regurgitation is expected after isolated aortic valve replacement for pure aortic insufficiency.

Download Full-text

P1518 Relationship between post-operative asymptomatic status and reverse remodeling of large left atrium in patients with aortic stenosis who underwent aortic valve replacement

European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging ◽

10.1093/ehjci/jez319.942 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 21 (Supplement_1) ◽

Author(s):

T Hozumi ◽

J Morimoto ◽

T Nishi ◽

K Takemoto ◽

S Fujita ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Aortic Valve ◽

Aortic Stenosis ◽

Aortic Valve Replacement ◽

Valve Replacement ◽

Left Atrial ◽

Left Atrial Volume ◽

Left Ventricular ◽

Volume Index ◽

Reverse Remodeling ◽

Atrial Volume

Abstract Introduction Recently, we have reported that large left atrial volume (minimum left atrial volume index : LAVImin ≥30ml/m²) at end-diastole determined by direct exposure of left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic pressure can predict post-operative symptomatic status after aortic valve replacement (AVR) in aortic stenosis (AS) patients with high sensitivity and modest specificity. Reverse remodeling of large LAVImin after AVR may contribute to false positive for the prediction of post-operative symptomatic status in patients with AS. Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate relationship between post-operative symptomatic status and reverse remodeling of large LAVImin in patients with AS who underwent AVR. Methods The study population consisted of 75 patients with AS who underwent AVR and were followed up for 600 days after AVR, after the exclusion of the followings; atrial fibrillation, significant coronary artery disease, significant mitral valve disease, pacemaker rhythm, and inadequate echocardiographic images. We measured LAVImin by biplane Simpson"s method before and after AVR. Preoperative large LAVImin (≥30ml/m²) according to the previous study was observed in 32 (43%) of 75 patients. We divided these 32 patients into two groups according to the post-operative symptomatic status during the follow-up period. Results There was no significant difference in pre-operative LAVImin between patients with and without post-operative symptom (46.5 ± 13.4 vs 40.4 ± 8.6 ml/m²). On the other hand, post-operative LAVImin in patients without post-operative symptom was significantly smaller than that in patients with post-operative symptom (31.5 ± 8.6 vs 54.8 ± 14.0 ml/m², p < 0.01). While significant regression in LAVImin after AVR was observed in patients without post-operative symptom (40.4 ± 8.6 to 31.5 ± 8.6 ml/m², p < 0.05), no regression in LAVImin after AVR was observed in patients with post-operative symptom (46.5 ± 13.4 to 54.8 ± 14.0 ml/m²). Conclusions Reverse remodeling of large LAVmin in patients with AS who underwent AVR was observed in post-operative asymptomatic group, but not in symptomatic group. These results suggest that reverse remodeling of large LAVImin after AVR could contribute to the post-operative asymptomatic status in patients with AS who underwent AVR.

Download Full-text