scholarly journals P907 Ventriculo-vascular interaction in patients with severe aortic stenosis: a comparison of three different clinical settings

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A E Vijiiac ◽  
C Neagu ◽  
A Cherry ◽  
S Onciul ◽  
D Zamfir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Severe Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Arterial System ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Clinical Settings ◽  
Aortic Valve Area ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements This work was supported by CREDO Project - ID: 49182, financed through the SOP IEC -A2-0.2.2.1-2013-1 cofinanced by the ERDF Ventriculo-arterial coupling (VAC) reflects the interaction between the ventricle and the arterial system and its prognostic role was studied in different clinical settings. VAC can be assessed with echocardiography as the ratio between the arterial elastance (Ea) and the end-systolic left ventricular elastance (EES). Data concerning the role of VAC in severe aortic stenosis (AS) are scarce. We aimed to determine VAC in patients (pts) with severe AS and assess its relationship with symptoms. We included 61 consecutive pts with severe AS (vave area < 1 cm2) and we divided them in 3 groups according to their symptoms: group A consisted of 28 pts (81 ± 10 yrs, 14 men) admitted for acute pulmonary edema, group B consisted of 25 pts (76 ± 12 yrs, 13 men) with either angina, syncope or dyspnea class I-III NYHA and group C consisted of 8 asymptomatic patients (71 ± 19 yrs, 3 men). We determined the VAC non-invasively and we compared the results between the 3 groups using one-way analysis of variance and a post-hoc Tukey test. There were no significant differences in age (p = 0.08) and aortic valve area (p = 0.18) between groups. Variations of Ea and EES between groups were not significant (p = 0.08 and p = 0.94, respectively). However, VAC differed significantly between the 3 groups, being most impaired in group A (1.11 ± 0.69), followed by 0.77 ± 0.23 in group B and 0.73 ± 0.16 in group C (p = 0.03). The left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) also differed significantly between groups: 41 ± 13% in group A, 51 ± 11% in group B and 57 ± 3% in group C (p < 0.001). VAC and the EF had a moderate negative correlation in group A (r=-0.52, p = 0.004) and group B (r=-0.51, p = 0.009), but no correlation in group C (p = 0.37). VAC is impaired in patients with severe AS and acute heart failure and it differs significantly from VAC in severe AS with chronic, stable symptoms and from VAC in asymptomatic severe AS. This suggests that the progression of symptoms in severe AS might be related to the interactions between the left ventricle and the vascular load, making thus VAC a potential therapeutic target and a parameter to be considered in the thorough evaluation of patients with severe AS. Group A Group B Group C Ea 2.69 ± 1.31 2.09 ± 0.94 1.95 ± 0.60 p = 0.08 EES 2.93 ± 1.90 2.87 ± 1.33 2.71 ± 0.73 p = 0.94 VAC 1.11 ± 0.69 0.77 ± 0.23* 0.73 ± 0.16* p = 0.03 EF 41 ± 13% 51 ± 11%* 57 ± 3%* p < 0.001 *significant difference with group A

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.

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

Abstract 15267: 1-Year Survival Post Trans-Catheter Aortic Replacement in Patients With Low and High-gradient Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Caleb Chiang ◽  
Mohamad Hemu ◽  
Jaafar Alward ◽  
Konstantinos Voudris ◽  
Hassam Suradi
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Aortic Valve Area ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
High Gradient ◽  
Aortic Replacement ◽  
Significant Difference

Introduction: There is limited data on trans-catheter aortic replacement (TAVR) outcomes in patients with low gradient-preserved ejection fraction aortic stenosis (LGpEF). Our study aims to compare baseline characteristics and procedural outcomes in patients with LGpEF vs. high gradient severe aortic stenosis (HGAS). Methods: Patients who underwent TAVR at our institution were divided in 2 groups: 1) HGAS (aortic valve area (AVA) < 1cm 2 , mean gradient (MG) > 40 mmHg); 2) LGpEF (AVA < 1cm 2 , MG <40 mmHg, left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 50%). Primary outcome included 1-year all-cause mortality post-TAVR. Multivariable cox proportional hazards model was adjusted for covariates of clinical significance (age, Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) score, chronic kidney disease (GFR < 60 mL/min/1.73m2), para-valvular leak (PVL) day 1 post-TAVR, and baseline New York Heart Association (NYHA) class. Results: A total of 140 patients with HGAS (53% female, 81±9 years old) and 73 patients with LGAS (51% female, 80±9.5 years old) were identified. In multivariable analyses, there was no statistically significant difference in mortality between HGAS vs. LGpEF (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.21-1.3; p=0.16) (Figure). PVL was independently associated with increased mortality in HGAS (HR 2.9, 95% CI 1.2-7.3; p=0.02) but this effect was not observed in patients with LGpEF. Conclusions: After adjusting for relevant patient characteristics, TAVR outcomes in patients with LGpEF were similar to those with HGAS at 1-year follow-up.

scholarly journals Moderate gradient severe aortic stenosis: diagnosis, prognosis and therapy

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_E) ◽  
pp. E133-E137
Author(s):  
Vittoria Rizzello
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Severe Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Calcium Score ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Low Flow ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Diagnostic Tools ◽  
Prognostic Impact ◽  
Aortic Valve Area ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Abstract Aortic stenosis (AS) is defined as severe in the presence of: mean gradient ≥40 mmHg, peak aortic velocity ≥4 m/s, and aortic valve area (AVA) ≤1 cm2 (or an indexed AVA ≤0.6 cm2/m2). However, up to 40% of patients have a discrepancy between gradient and AVA, i.e. AVA ≤1 cm2 (indicating severe AS) and a moderate gradient: &gt;20 and &lt;40 mmHg (typical of moderate stenosis). This condition is called ‘low-gradient AS’ and includes very heterogeneous clinical entities, with different pathophysiological mechanisms. The diagnostic tools needed to discriminate the different low-gradient AS phenotypes include colour-Doppler echocardiography, dobutamine stress echocardiography, computed tomography scan for the definition of the calcium score, and recently magnetic resonance imaging. The prognostic impact of low-gradient AS is heterogeneous. Classical low-flow low-gradient AS [reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)] has the worst prognosis, followed by paradoxical low-flow low-gradient AS (preserved LVEF). Conversely, normal-flow low-gradient AS is associated with a better prognosis. The indications of the guidelines recommend surgical or percutaneous treatment, depending on the risk and comorbidities of the individual patient, both for patients with classic low-flow low-gradient AS and for those with paradoxical low-flow low-gradient AS.

scholarly journals IMPULSE: the impact of gender on the presentation and management of aortic stenosis across Europe

Open Heart ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e001443
Author(s):  
Richard Paul Steeds ◽  
David Messika-Zeitoun ◽  
Jeetendra Thambyrajah ◽  
Antonio Serra ◽  
Eberhard Schulz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Severe Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Patient Profile ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽  
The Impact

AimsThere is an increasing awareness of gender-related differences in patients with severe aortic stenosis and their outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).MethodsData from the IMPULSE registry were analysed. Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) were enrolled between March 2015 and April 2017 and stratified by gender. A subgroup analysis was performed to assess the impact of age.ResultsOverall, 2171 patients were enrolled, and 48.0% were female. Women were characterised by a higher rate of renal impairment (31.7 vs 23.3%; p<0.001), were at higher surgical risk (EuroSCORE II: 4.5 vs 3.6%; p=0.001) and more often in a critical preoperative state (7.0vs 4.2%; p=0.003). Men had an increased rate of previous cardiac surgery (9.4 vs 4.7%; p<0.001) and a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (4.9 vs 1.3%; p<0.001). Concomitant mitral and tricuspid valve disease was substantially more common among women. Symptoms were highly prevalent in both women and men (83.6 vs 77.3%; p<0.001). AVR was planned in 1379 cases. Women were more frequently scheduled to undergo TAVI (49.3 vs 41.0%; p<0.001) and less frequently for SAVR (20.3 vs 27.5%; p<0.001).ConclusionsThe present data show that female patients with severe AS have a distinct patient profile and are managed in a different way to males. Gender-based differences in the management of patients with severe AS need to be taken into account more systematically to improve outcomes, especially for women.

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

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Said Alsidawi ◽  
Sana Khan ◽  
Sorin V. Pislaru ◽  
Jeremy J. Thaden ◽  
Edward A. El-Am ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Low Flow ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Aortic Valve Area ◽  
Flow State ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction

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 cm 2 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.

Abstract 155: Prevalence and Clinical Correlates of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy by Sokolow-Lyon and Cornell Electrocardiogram Voltage Criteria in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Xiao ◽  
Augustin Delago ◽  
Mohammad El-Hajjar ◽  
Batyrjan Bulibek ◽  
Mikhail Torosoff
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Severe Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Aortic Valve Area ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Cornell Voltage

Background and Hypothesis: The sensitivity of LVH analysis by ECG voltage criteria in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis undergoing trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has not yet been studied. LVH is expected in the TAVR population and would be reflected in voltage criteria by ECG. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted in 176 consecutive TAVR patients without ventricular-paced rhythm. ECG data was collected and analyzed by Sokolow-Lyon and Cornell Voltage criteria. Results were compared to transthoracic echocardiogram. Analyses of variation, correlation, chi-square, and logistic regression were used. The study was approved by the institutional IRB. Results: Sokolow-Lyon and Cornell Voltage criteria for LVH were present and concordant in 19% (33 of 176) of patients; in 49% (86 of 176) of patients, neither criteria was suggestive for LVH. Only 19% (34 of 176) of patients had LVH by Cornell Voltage and 13% (23 of 176) by Sokolow-Lyon criteria, indicative of poor concordance between these two commonly used ECG criteria for LVH (p<0.0001). Ejection fraction, aortic valve gradient, aortic valve area, COPD, PVD, prior stroke, dyslipidemia, and hypertension did not affect the prevalence of LVH by either or both criteria. Women (p<0.01) and patients with rhythm other than atrial fibrillation (p<0.0053) were more likely to have voltage criteria for LVH, while older adults were more likely to meet criteria for LVH. Concordant LVH criteria were noted in patients 84.6 +/- 7.2 years of age, while patients without LVH by ECG voltage criteria were significantly younger at 80.21 +/- 8.1 years of age (p<0.007). Conclusion: The presence of LVH by Sokolow-Lyon and Cornell ECG voltage criteria poorly correlates with the presence of LVH and critical aortic stenosis in TAVR patients. Women are more likely to have voltage criteria for LVH. Therefore, ECG may not be a suitable method of screening patients with severe aortic stenosis for LVH, especially in men.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document