Prognostic value of exercise left ventricular end-systolic volume index in patients with asymptomatic aortic regurgitation: an exercise echocardiography study

Outcomes of Watchful Waiting Strategy and Predictors of Postoperative Prognosis in Asymptomatic or Equivocally Symptomatic Chronic Severe Aortic Regurgitation With Preserved Left Ventricular Function

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical timing for asymptomatic or equivocally symptomatic chronic severe aortic regurgitation with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction remains controversial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Two hundred ten consecutive patients (median age 65 years) with asymptomatic or equivocally symptomatic chronic severe aortic regurgitation and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50% were registered. First, the treatment plans (aortic valve replacement or watchful waiting) after initial diagnosis were investigated. Then, 2 studies were set: Study A (n=144) investigated the prognosis of patients who were managed under the watchful waiting strategy after initial diagnosis; Study B (n=99) investigated the postoperative prognosis in patients who underwent aortic valve replacement at initial diagnosis or after watchful waiting. The primary outcomes were all-cause death in Study A and postoperative cardiovascular events in Study B. In Study A, 3 died of noncardiovascular causes during a median follow-up of 3.2 years. In Kaplan-Meier analysis, the survival curve was similar to that of an age-sex-matched general population in Japan. In Study B, 9 experienced the primary outcome during a median follow-up of 5.0 years. In Cox regression analysis, preoperative left ventricular end-systolic diameter enlargement (hazard ratio, 1.11; P=0.048) and left ventricular end-systolic diameter >45 mm (hazard ratio, 12.75; P=0.02) were significantly associated with poor postoperative prognosis. In Kaplan-Meier analysis, left ventricular end-systolic diameter >45 mm predicted a higher risk of the primary outcome (P <0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Watchful waiting was achieved safely in asymptomatic or equivocally symptomatic chronic severe aortic regurgitation with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. Preoperative left ventricular end-systolic diameter >45 mm predicted a poor postoperative outcome and may be an optimal cut-off value for surgical indication.

Stress echocardiography in valvular heart disease

Valvular heart disease (VHD) has been a significant health problem, particularly in developed countries, in relation to the aging population. Recent developments in the management of VHD require a more accurate assessment of disease severity to determine the need for transcatheter interventions or open heart surgery. Stress echocardiography is a crucial imaging modality for identifying the underlying pathology of VHD. Optimal administration of exercise or intravenous drugs may reveal hemodynamic abnormalities under stress without posing an invasive risk. Therefore, the implementation of stress echocardiography is recommended for determining interventional indications and risk stratification in mitral regurgitation and aortic stenosis. In addition, recent evidence has accumulated regarding the usefulness of stress echocardiography in various conditions including mitral stenosis, aortic regurgitation, and post-interventional VHD. Here, we summarize the current evidence and future perspectives on stress echocardiography in VHD.

Optimal Management of Chronic Severe Aortic Regurgitation - How to Determine Cutoff Values for Surgical Intervention?

Aortic regurgitation (AR) is a common valvular heart disease, but the optimal timing of surgical intervention remains controversial. In the natural history of chronic severe AR, sudden death is rare, and the annual mortality rate is comparatively low. Considering the hemodynamic features of combined volume and pressure overload and long-term compensation in patients with chronic AR, symptoms related to AR do not frequently occur. Therefore, the progression of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction is a key factor in determining the timing of surgical intervention in patients with severe chronic AR. In addition to symptoms, an ejection fraction <50% and an LV endsystolic diameter (LVESD) >45 mm are appropriate cutoff values for surgical intervention in Japanese patients, whereas LV end-diastolic diameter is not a good indicator. An LVESD index of 25 mm/m²is controversial, because adjusting for body size may cause overcorrection in Japanese patients who have a small body size compared with Westerners. Accumulation of data from the Japanese population is indispensable for establishing guidelines on optimal management of patients with chronic AR.

Ratiology and a Complementary Class of Metrics for Cardiovascular Investigations

Cardiovascular investigations often involve ratio-based metrics or differences: ejection fraction, arterial pressure augmentation index, coronary fractional flow reserve, pulse pressure. Focusing on a single number (ratio or difference) implies that information is lost. The lost companions constitute a well-defined but thus far unrecognized class, having additive value, a physical dimension, and often a physiological meaning. Physiologists should play a prominent role in exploring these complementary avenues and also define alternatives.

Perioperative dental screening and treatment in patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery and interventional cardiovascular procedures. A consensus report based on RAND/UCLA methodology

AIM

To reach a consensus on a consistent strategy to adopt when screening patients for dental/periodontal infections and on the feasibility of providing dental treatment before cardiothoracic surgery, cardiovascular surgery or other cardiovascular invasive procedures.

METHODOLOGY

A panel of experts from six Italian scientific societies was created. The deliberations of the panel were based on the RAND method. From an initial systematic literature review, it became clear that a consensually validated protocol for the reproducible dental screening of patients awaiting cardiac interventions was considered mandatory by professionals with expertise in the dental, cardiologic and cardiac surgery areas. However, a systematic review also concluded that the treatment options to be provided, their prognosis and timing in relation to the physical condition of patients, had never been defined. Following the systematic review, several fundamental questions were generated. The panel was divided into two working groups each of which produced documents that addressed the topic and which were subsequently used to generate a questionnaire. Each member of the panel completed the questionnaire independently, and then, a panel discussion was held to reach a consensus on how best to manage patients with dental/periodontal infections who were awaiting invasive cardiac procedures.

RESULTS

A high level of agreement was reached regarding all the items on the questionnaire, and each of the clinical questions formulated were answered. Three tables were created which can be used to generate a useful tool to provide standardized dental/periodontal screening of patients undergoing elective cardiovascular interventions and to summarize both the possible oral and cardiovascular conditions of the patient and the timing available for the procedures considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Upon publication of this consensus document, the dissemination of the information to a wide dental and cardiac audience should commence. The authors hope that this consensus will become a model for the development of a dedicated protocol, ideally usable by heart and dental teams in the pre-interventional preparation phase.