Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of patients with moderate to severe aortic stenosis and preserved, mid-range and reduced ejection fraction

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
N Chew ◽  
N Ngiam ◽  
B.Y.Q Tan ◽  
C.H Sia ◽  
H.W Sim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Severe Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Aortic Valve Area ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background Left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) plays an important role in risk stratifying and guiding therapy for patients with aortic stenosis (AS). This study aims to describe the clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of AS patients with preserved (ASpEF), mid-range (ASmrEF) and reduced (ASrEF) EF. Methods 713 consecutive patients with index echocardiographic diagnosis of moderate-severe AS (aortic valve area <1.5cm2) were allocated according to the EF into three groups: ASrEF (EF<40%), ASmrEF (EF 40–50%), and ASpEF (EF>50%). The study outcomes were defined as 5-year all-cause mortality, heart failure admissions, and aortic valve replacement (AVR). Results In comparison to patients with ASpEF, those with ASrEF were more frequently male, and systolic blood pressure was significantly lower on enrolment (p<0.001). Diabetes, ischemic heart disease and atrial fibrillation were more commonly seen in the ASrEF and ASmrEF groups, compared to ASpEF group. All-cause mortality rates were 30.5% for ASpEF, 50.8% for ASmrEF, 55.0% for ASrEF groups (p<0.001). Increased rates of heart failure admissions were seen in the ASmrEF and ASrEF groups (30.5% and 33.9%, respectively, vs. 14.9% in ASpEF group). Patients with ASrEF had significantly higher rates of AVR as compared to those in the ASmrEF and ASpEF groups (p=0.032). Conclusion Echocardiographic and clinical outcomes of ASmrEF patients resembled those of ASrEF more closely than the ASpEF patients. Stratifying AS patients according to the different EF groups may improve risk assessment and treatment strategies. Figure 1 Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Natural Progression of Low-Gradient Severe Aortic Stenosis with Preserved Ejection Fraction

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 273-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antony Leslie Innasimuthu ◽  
Sanjay Kumar ◽  
Jason Lazar ◽  
William E. Katz
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Severe Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Aortic Valve Area ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Mild Stenosis ◽  
Natural Progression

Because the natural progression of low-gradient aortic stenosis (LGAS) has not been well defined, we performed a retrospective study of 116 consecutive patients with aortic stenosis who had undergone follow-up echocardiography at a median interval of 698 days (range, 371–1,020 d). All patients had preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (>0.50) during and after follow-up. At baseline, patients were classified by aortic valve area (AVA) as having mild stenosis (≥1.5 cm2), moderate stenosis (≥1 to <1.5 cm2), or severe stenosis (<1 cm2). Severe aortic stenosis was further classified by mean gradient (LGAS, mean <40 mmHg; high-gradient aortic stenosis [HGAS], mean ≥40 mmHg). We compared baseline and follow-up values among 4 groups: patients with mild stenosis, moderate stenosis, LGAS, and HGAS. At baseline, 30 patients had mild stenosis, 54 had moderate stenosis, 24 had LGAS, and 8 had HGAS. Compared with the moderate group, the LGAS group had lower AVA but similar mean gradient. Yet the actuarial curves for progressing to HGAS were significantly different: 25% of patients in LGAS reached HGAS status significantly earlier than did 25% of patients in the moderate-AS group (713 vs 881 d; P=0.035). Because LGAS has a high propensity to progress to HGAS, we propose that low-gradient aortic stenosis patients be closely monitored as a distinct subgroup that warrants more frequent echocardiographic follow-up.

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

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anastasia Vamvakidou ◽  
Mohamed-Salah Annabi ◽  
Phillipe Pibarot ◽  
Edyta Plonska-Gosciniak ◽  
Ana G. Almeida ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Aortic Valve Area ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Valve Area

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 cm 2 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 <1cm 2 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 cm 2 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 <1cm 2 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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document