Abstract 14140: The Weight of the Evidence: Comparison of Operatively Excised Aortic Valve Weights in Patients With High Gradient versus Low Gradient Aortic Stenosis and Overall Survival Following Aortic Valve Replacement

Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara M Negrotto ◽  
Jeremy J Thaden ◽  
Rakesh M Suri ◽  
Joseph J Maleszewski ◽  
Sorin V Pislaru ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Peripheral Resistance ◽  
Stroke Volume Index ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Volume Index ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Aortic Valves ◽  
High Gradient

Introduction: Excised aortic valve weight (AVW) correlates with severity of AS. There is some debate about the true severity of AS in low gradient AS (LGAS) compared to high gradient AS (HGAS). We sought to compare patient characteristics and operatively excised AVW in patients with LGAS vs HGAS vs moderate AS. Methods: 916 patients with EF ≥50% undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement for AS between 2010-2012 were included. Clinical and echocardiographic characteristics of LGAS patients (AVA≤1cm 2 , MnG<40mmHg; N=68) were compared to HGAS patients (AVA≤1cm 2 , MnG≥40mmHg; N=745) and operatively excised AVW were compared to moderate AS (AVA>1cm 2 , MnG<40mmHg; N=102). Results: Compared to HGAS, LGAS patients were older (mean age 77 ± 10 vs 73 ± 10 years; p=0.001), often female (56% vs 38%; p=0.006), but without differences in diabetes (26% vs 29%; p=0.78), hyperlipidemia (85% vs 86%, p=0.86), coronary artery disease (49% vs 44%; p=0.53), or hypertension (81% vs 76%; p=0.38). LGAS patients predominantly had trileaflet aortic valves (91% vs 71%; p<0.001), smaller LVOT diameter (2.16 ± 0.15 vs 2.25 ± 0.20 cm; p=0.002), lower stroke volume index (42.1 ± 7.3 vs 49.0 ± 8.8 cc/m 2 ; p<0.001), lower systemic compliance (0.77 ± 0.30 vs 0.93 ± 0.33 ; p<0.001), but no difference in valvulo-arterial impedance (3.96 ± 0.76 vs. 3.84 ± 0.80, p=0.24) compared to HGAS. Excised AVW were lower in patients with LGAS vs HGAS (1.77 ± 0.76 vs 2.69 ± 1.26 g, p<0.001), but not different from moderate AS (1.77 ± 0.76 vs 2.04 ± 0.94 g; p=0.1). This relationship held true when AVW was indexed to body surface area. Three-year mortality post-valve replacement was significantly higher in LGAS compared to HGAS (22% vs 11%, p=0.02). Conclusions: LGAS occurs mostly in older female patients with trileaflet aortic valves. Excised AVW in LGAS is similar to moderate AS but lower than HGAS. However, systemic compliance is higher in LGAS vs HGAS contributing to increased afterload. Poorer outcomes after surgery in LGAS patients may be attributed to noncompliant vasculature which is not corrected with valve replacement and evaluation of patients with LGAS should include assessment of peripheral resistance.

scholarly journals Impact of Flow on Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch Following Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amr E. Abbas ◽  
Julien Ternacle ◽  
Philippe Pibarot ◽  
Ke Xu ◽  
Maria Alu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Cardiac Death ◽  
Stroke Volume Index ◽  
Volume Index ◽  
Normal Flow ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

Background: Severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) is diagnosed by an indexed effective orifice area <0.65 cm 2 /m 2 , which is derived from stroke volume index. We examined the impact of flow, determined by stroke volume index, on severe PPM following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Methods: We included SAVR patients from the PARTNER 2A trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve 2A) and TAVR patients from the PARTNER 2 S3i (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve 2 S3i) registry. The primary end point was the separate analysis of all-cause death, cardiac death, and rehospitalization at 5 years. Following TAVR and SAVR, we compared the primary end points between severe versus no-severe PPM in all patients, in low flow (LF), and in normal flow. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine variables associated with the end points. Results: Nine hundred fifty-four TAVR and 726 SAVR patients with PPM and flow data were included. Severe PPM following TAVR was significantly lower compared with SAVR in all patients (9% versus 28%, P <0.0001), in normal flow (5% versus 8%, P =0.04), and in LF (20% versus 42%, P <0.0001). Severe PPM was associated with rehospitalization following TAVR (odds ratio, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.01–2.29], P =0.0456) and SAVR (odds ratio, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.06–2.16], P =0.0237). Severe PPM in LF was independently associated with cardiac death following TAVR (odds ratio, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.06–3.23], P =0.0308). Following SAVR, severe PPM in LF and low ejection fraction was associated with increased cardiac death (35.26% versus 12.51%, P =0.01) and rehospitalization (37.59% versus 15.46%, P =0.006) compared with severe PPM in LF and preserved ejection fraction, respectively. Severe PPM in normal flow was not associated with clinical outcomes despite higher gradients and smaller valves compared with severe PPM in LF. Conclusions: Severe PPM is more common following SAVR compared with TAVR. Regardless of the implanted valve size or gradient, severe PPM impacts mortality only in patients with LF following TAVR and LF and low ejection fraction following SAVR. Severe PPM in normal flow is not associated with poor outcomes. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifiers: NCT01314313 and NCT02687035.

scholarly journals The Association between Aortic Valve Weight, Echocardiographic Indices, and All-Cause Death in 1,046 Patients Undergoing Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis

Cardiology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 145 (4) ◽  
pp. 251-261
Author(s):  
Jonathan Weber ◽  
Simcha Pollack ◽  
Florentina Petillo ◽  
Ana Anagnostopoulos ◽  
J. Jane Cao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Stroke Volume Index ◽  
Continuous Variable ◽  
Volume Index ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Entire Cohort ◽  
Impact On Survival

Background: Aortic valve weight (AVW), a flow independent measure of aortic stenosis (AS) severity, is reported to have heterogeneous associations with the echocardiographic variables used for AS evaluation. Controversy exists regarding its impact on survival after aortic valve replacement (AVR). Objective: We sought to determine the association between AVW with echocardiographic measures of AS severity and all-cause mortality after surgical AVR. Methods: One thousand and forty-sixconsecutive patients underwent surgical AVR for AS, the excised valves were weighed, and an echocardiogram was done before surgery. Results: Males had heavier valves than females, for both absolute and body surface are (BSA)-indexed values (2.78 ± 1.23 vs. 2.08 ± 0.68 g, p < 0.001; and 1.38 ± 0.61 vs. 1.19 ± 0.41 g/m2, p < 0.001, respectively). In a restricted cohort of 634 patients with isolated severe AS and normal ejection fraction, the correlations of AVW with echocardiographic variables of AS were modest, the strongest being with the dimensionless index (r = –0.27 and –0.26 for male and female, both p < 0.01). Stratified by stroke volume index and mean gradient (MG), no associations were found in the low-gradient groups (i.e., MG <40 mmHg). At a median follow-up of 3.5 years, there were only 244 deaths in the entire cohort. Mortality was not related to AVW, except in females who displayed an inverse relationship (HR = 0.67; 95% CI 0.47–0.95) only when it was analyzed as a continuous variable. Conclusions: The weak correlation between AVW with the echocardiographic indices of AS may reflect its complex pathophysiology, heterogeneous hemodynamics, and possible pitfalls in the current echocardiographic methods used in clinical practice. The prognostic value of AVW after AVR warrants further evaluation.

scholarly journals Comparison of in-hospital outcomes and readmissions for valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement vs. reoperative surgical aortic valve replacement: a contemporary assessment of real-world outcomes

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (29) ◽  
pp. 2747-2755 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sameer A Hirji ◽  
Edward D Percy ◽  
Cheryl K Zogg ◽  
Alexandra Malarczyk ◽  
Morgan T Harloff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Aortic Valves ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Valve In Valve

Abstract Aims We sought to perform a head-to-head comparison of contemporary 30-day outcomes and readmissions between valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (VIV-TAVR) patients and a matched cohort of high-risk reoperative surgical aortic valve replacement (re-SAVR) patients using a large, multicentre, national database. Methods and results We utilized the nationally weighted 2012–16 National Readmission Database claims to identify all US adult patients with degenerated bioprosthetic aortic valves who underwent either VIV-TAVR (n = 3443) or isolated re-SAVR (n = 3372). Thirty-day outcomes were compared using multivariate analysis and propensity score matching (1:1). Unadjusted, VIV-TAVR patients had significantly lower 30-day mortality (2.7% vs. 5.0%), 30-day morbidity (66.4% vs. 79%), and rates of major bleeding (35.8% vs. 50%). On multivariable analysis, re-SAVR was a significant risk factor for both 30-day mortality [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of VIV-SAVR (vs. re-SAVR) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28–0.81] and 30-day morbidity [aOR for VIV-TAVR (vs. re-SAVR) 0.54, 95% CI 0.43–0.68]. After matching (n = 2181 matched pairs), VIV-TAVR was associated with lower odds of 30-day mortality (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23–0.74), 30-day morbidity (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.43–0.72), and major bleeding (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.51–0.85). Valve-in-valve TAVR was also associated with shorter length of stay (median savings of 2 days, 95% CI 1.3–2.7) and higher odds of routine home discharges (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.61–2.78) compared to re-SAVR. Conclusion In this large, nationwide study of matched high-risk patients with degenerated bioprosthetic aortic valves, VIV-TAVR appears to confer an advantage over re-SAVR in terms of 30-day mortality, morbidity, and bleeding complications. Further studies are warranted to benchmark in low- and intermediate-risk patients and to adequately assess longer-term efficacy.

scholarly journals Clinical impact of pathology-proven etiology of severely stenotic aortic valves on mid-term outcomes in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. e0229721
Author(s):  
Shiro Miura ◽  
Katsumi Inoue ◽  
Hiraku Kumamaru ◽  
Takehiro Yamashita ◽  
Michiya Hanyu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Clinical Impact ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Aortic Valves

scholarly journals P301 The prognostic value of preoperative left atrial volume after surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with isolated severe aortic stenosis and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A D Mateescu ◽  
A Calin ◽  
M Rosca ◽  
C C Beladan ◽  
R Enache ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Left Atrial ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Volume Index ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background Left atrial (LA) volume is an important cardiovascular prognostic marker. However, data regarding the prognostic value of LA volume in severe AS patients (pts) after surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) are scarce. Moreover, the predictive role of LA function in AS pts after AVR has not yet been studied. Our study aimed to assess the relationship of LA volume index (LAVi) and function with outcome, in terms of mortality, in severe AS pts who underwent surgical AVR. Methods A total of 360 consecutive pts with isolated severe AS (aortic valve area index ≤ 0.6 cm2/m2) referred to our echocardiography laboratory were prospectively screened. Two hundred and seventeen pts with preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (≥50%) and in sinus rhythm were enrolled. All patients underwent a baseline comprehensive echocardiogram, including speckle tracking analysis of both LV and LA strain. Symptomatic pts (142 pts, 65%) that were subject to AVR were followed for a median period of 4 years (IQR 3-6 years). The endpoint was all-cause mortality after AVR. The last update of the survival status was obtained in January 2019. Outcome data were available in 116 severe AS pts that underwent AVR (mean age 63 ± 10 yrs, 56% men), who formed the final study population. Results Seventeen (14%) pts died during follow-up. No significant differences were found between nonsurvivors and survivors after AVR in terms of age and cardiovascular risk factors. Nonsurvivors had higher BNP plasma values (p=.04) at baseline compared with surviving pts. Survivors and nonsurvivors alike exhibited similar preoperative AS severity and LV systolic function parameters (ejection fraction and global longitudinal strain). Moreover, there were no significant differences between the two groups regarding baseline valvuloarterial impedance, average E/e’ ratio, and LA longitudinal deformation parameters. Nonsurvivors had a tendency toward higher LV mass index (p=.08). Nonsurvivors had higher preoperative LA volume index (LAVi)(50 ± 12 vs. 44 ± 10 ml/m2, p=.003). In a multivariable Cox regression analysis adjusted for age, LAVi emerged as the only independent predictor for death in our population study (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.11, p=.02). A cut-off value for LAVi derived from ROC curve analysis was used to construct Kaplan-Meier survival curves. A value of 43 ml/m2 for LAVi predicted all-cause mortality after AVR in severe AS pts with 71% sensitivity and 54% specificity. Conclusions In our study, preoperative LAVi predicted death in severe AS pts after surgical AVR. LAVi assessment may improve preoperative risk stratification in patients with severe AS, however further larger prospective studies are needed. Abstract P301 Figure.

New or Worsened Mitral Regurgitation After Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
pp. 108925322098220
Author(s):  
Nicolas Kumar ◽  
Julia E. Kumar ◽  
Nasir Hussain ◽  
Leonid Gorelik ◽  
Michael K. Essandoh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Mitral Regurgitation ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Clinical Measures

Background New or worsened mitral regurgitation (MR) is an uncommon yet serious complication after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). While there have been numerous reports of its occurrence, there is little consensus regarding its presentation and management. This systematic review summarizes the evidence in the current literature surrounding new or worsened MR after SAVR and analyzes its potential implications. Methods Databases were examined for all articles and abstracts reporting on new or worsened MR after SAVR. Data collected included number of patients studied; patient characteristics; incidences of new or worsened MR; timing of diagnosis; and treatment. Results Thirty-six full-text citations were included in this review. The prevalence of new or worsened MR after SAVR was 8.4%. Sixteen percent of new MR occurrences were from an organic etiology, and 83% of new MR occurrences were that of a functional etiology. Most diagnoses were made in the late or unspecified postoperative period using echocardiography (range: 0 minutes to 18 years postoperatively). While no patients died from this complication, 7.7% of patients (16 out of 207) required emergent procedural re-intervention. Conclusions This systematic review underscores the importance of identifying new or worsened MR following SAVR and accurate scoring of MR severity to guide treatment. It also outlines the associated clinical measures commonly documented following this complication, and the usefulness of transesophageal echocardiography for the detection of significant MR. These results reflect the current, limited state of the literature on this topic and warrant further investigation into MR detection and management strategies in SAVR patients.

scholarly journals TAVR in patients with low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis – outcome data after three years from one large centre

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Steffen ◽  
N Reissig ◽  
M Zadrozny ◽  
J Fischer ◽  
D Andreae ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Stroke Volume Index ◽  
Low Flow ◽  
Volume Index ◽  
Severe Aortic Regurgitation ◽  
Sts Score ◽  
Baseline Characteristics

Abstract Background The outcome of patients with low-flow low-gradient (LFLG) aortic stenosis after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is not well evaluated. Long-term clinical success is thought to be less pronounced in LFLG patients compared to patients with high gradient (HG) aortic stenosis. Purpose The purpose of this study was to characterise different LFLG groups and determine their outcome after TAVR. We hypothesised that there would be relevant differences in baseline characteristics and patient survival after TAVR. Methods All patients undergoing TAVR for severe aortic stenosis at our centre between 2013 and 2019 were included in the study. Patients have been split into groups according preinterventional echocardiography data according to mean pressure gradient (dPmean), ejection fraction (EF), and stroke volume index (SVi). Patients with a dPmean &lt;40 mmHg and SVi ≤35 ml/m2 were subdivided into classical low-flow low-gradient (cLFLG, EF &lt;50%) and paradoxical low-flow (pLFLG, EF ≥50%). Patients with previous aortic valve replacement or severe aortic regurgitation were excluded from the analysis. Results 1,772 patients were analysed (mean follow-up 2.2 years, median age 81.7 [77.5–85.7] years) and split into groups: HG, 953 patients (54.3%), cLFLG, 446 patients (25.2%), and pLFLG 373 patients (21.1%). Baseline characteristics showed significant differences (p&lt;0.01), among others, in sex (male sex, HG 46.1% vs. cLFLG 69.5% vs. pLFLG 44.5%), rate of atrial fibrillation (HG 20.3% vs. cLFLG 36.3% vs. pLFLG 41.6%), coronary artery disease (HG 56.2% vs. cLFLG 73.5% vs. pLFLG 63.4%), and grade 3 or 4 mitral regurgitation (HG 2.2% vs. cLFLG 5.5% vs. pLFLG 6.8%). Accordingly, Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Scores differed significantly: HG, 3.0 [2.0–5.0], cLFLG, 5.0 [3.0–7.3] pLFLG, 3.9 [2.2–6.0] (p&lt;0.01). Rates of periprocedural complications including death, device failure, pericardial effusion, stroke or myocardial infarction were comparable between groups. Mortality rate (figure 1) was highest for cLFLG patients (43.4% [95% confidence interval, 37.3–48.6%]) compared to HG (25.1% [21.6–28.5%]) or pLFLG (32.9% [26.9–38.4%]), Log-rank test, &lt;0.001. Corresponding hazard ratios were 2.1 [1.7–2.6] (p&lt;0.001) for cLFLG and 1.5 [1.2–2.0] (p&lt;0.001) for pLFLG. Similar results were obtained when adjusting to STS score (figure 2). Conclusion In this all-comer analysis, almost half of the patients belong toLFLG groups with considerable differences in patient characteristics. While equally safe during the procedure, patients with LFLG aortic stenosis show increased 3-year mortality rates compared to patients with HG aortic stenosis. Further studies evaluating this are needed. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Figure 1. 3-year mortality Figure 2. STS score-adjusted mortality

scholarly journals IMPORTANCE OF AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT ON STROKE VOLUME INDEX IN LOW FLOW SEVERE AORTIC VALVE STENOSIS

2014 ◽  
Vol 63 (12) ◽  
pp. A2000
Author(s):  
Jordi S. Dahl ◽  
Kristian Wachtell ◽  
Lars Videbaek ◽  
Mikael K. Poulsen ◽  
Nicolaj Christensen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Stroke Volume ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Aortic Valve Stenosis ◽  
Stroke Volume Index ◽  
Low Flow ◽  
Volume Index
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document