Correlates of the ratio of acceleration time to ejection time in patients with aortic stenosis: An echocardiographic and computed tomography study

A Doppler-exclusive non-invasive computational diagnostic framework for personalized transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Given the associated risks with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), it is crucial to determine how the implant will affect the valve dynamics and cardiac function, and if TAVR will improve or worsen the outcome of the patient. Effective treatment strategies, indeed, rely heavily on the complete understanding of the valve dynamics. We developed an innovative Doppler-exclusive non-invasive computational framework that can function as a diagnostic tool to assess valve dynamics in patients with aortic stenosis in both pre- and post-TAVR status. Clinical Doppler pressure was reduced by TAVR (52.2 ± 20.4 vs. 17.3 ± 13.8 [mmHg], p < 0.001), but it was not always accompanied by improvements in valve dynamics and left ventricle (LV) hemodynamics metrics. TAVR had no effect on LV workload in 4 patients, and LV workload post-TAVR significantly rose in 4 other patients. Despite the group level improvements in maximum LV pressure (166.4 ± 32.2 vs 131.4 ± 16.9 [mmHg], p < 0.05), only 5 of the 12 patients (41%) had a decrease in LV pressure. Moreover, TAVR did not always improve valve dynamics. TAVR did not necessarily result in a decrease (in 9 out of 12 patients investigated in this study) in major principal stress on the aortic valve leaflets which is one of the main contributors in valve degeneration and, consequently, failure of heart valves. Diastolic stresses increased significantly post-TAVR (34%, 109% and 81%, p < 0.001) for each left, right and non-coronary leaflets respectively. Moreover, we quantified the stiffness and material properties of aortic valve leaflets which correspond with the reduced calcified region average stiffness among leaflets (66%, 74% and 62%; p < 0.001; N = 12). Valve dynamics post-intervention should be quantified and monitored to ensure the improvement of patient conditions and prevent any further complications. Improper evaluation of biomechanical valve features pre-intervention as well as post-intervention may result in harmful effects post-TAVR in patients including paravalvular leaks, valve degeneration, failure of TAVR and heart failure.

The diagnostic role of "acceleration time" measurement in patients with classical low flow low gradient aortic stenosis with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction

PURPOSE

In our study, we aimed to assess the role of acceleration time (AT), ejection time (ET), and AT/ET ratio to distinguish between true and pseudo severe AS in patients with classical low flow-low gradient (LF-LG) aortic stenosis (AS) with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

METHODS

Sixty-seven classical LF-LG AS with reduced LVEF patients who underwent dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) were included in the study. According to DSE results, all patients were divided into two groups; true AS and pseudo severe AS. Aortic valve calcium score was measured in patients with inconclusive DSE results. AT and other ejection dynamics (ET and AT/ET) were calculated by taking baseline echocardiographic records into account for all patients. The predictive power of AT and other ejection dynamics were evaluated to estimate true and pseudo severe AS.

RESULTS

According to DSE results, out of 67 patients, 44 (65.7%) was diagnosed as true severe AS. There was a statistically significant relation between baseline AT and true AS [adjusted OR 4.47 (95% CI 1.93-10.4), p = 0.001]. The best cutoff value of AT was measured as 100 msec according to the Youden index. This value had a sensitivity value of 77%, specificity value of 87%, positive predictive value of 92%, and a negative predictive value of 67%.

CONCLUSION

The measurement of AT can predict the DSE outcome and can be used for diagnostic purposes to distinguish between true and pseudo severe AS in classical LF-LG AS patients with reduced LVEF.

Relationship Between the Ratio of Acceleration Time/Ejection Time and Mortality in Patients With High-Gradient Severe Aortic Stenosis

Background

The ratio of acceleration time/ejection time (AT/ET) is a simple and reproducible echocardiographic parameter that integrates aortic stenosis severity and its consequences on the left ventricle. No study has specifically assessed the prognostic impact of AT/ET on outcome in patients with high‐gradient severe aortic stenosis (SAS) and no or mild symptoms. We sought to evaluate the relationship between AT/ET and mortality and determine the best predictive AT/ET cutoff value in these patients.

Methods and Results

A total of 353 patients (median age, 79 years; 46% women) with high‐gradient (mean pressure gradient ≥40 mm Hg and/or aortic peak jet velocity ≥4 m/s) SAS, left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50%, and no or mild symptoms were studied. The impact of AT/ET ≤0.35 or >0.35 on all‐cause mortality was retrospectively studied. During a median follow‐up of 39 (25th–75th percentile, 23–62) months, 70 patients died. AT/ET >0.35 was associated with a considerable increased mortality risk after adjustment for established prognostic factors in SAS under medical and/or surgical management (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 2.54; 95% CI, 1.47–4.37; P<0.001) or conservative management (adjusted HR, 3.29; 95% CI, 1.70–6.39; P<0.001). Moreover, AT/ET >0.35 improved the predictive performance of models including established risk factors in SAS with better global model fit, reclassification, and discrimination. After propensity matching, increased mortality risk persisted when AT/ET >0.35 (adjusted HR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.12–3.90; P<0.001).

Conclusions

AT/ET >0.35 is a strong predictor of outcome in patients with SAS and no or only mild symptoms and identifies a subgroup of patients at higher risk of death who may derive benefit from earlier aortic valve replacement.

Multimodality Imaging for Discordant Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis: Assessing the Valve and the Myocardium

Aortic stenosis (AS) is a disease of the valve and the myocardium. A correct assessment of the valve disease severity is key to define the need for aortic valve replacement (AVR), but a better understanding of the myocardial consequences of the increased afterload is paramount to optimize the timing of the intervention. Transthoracic echocardiography remains the cornerstone of AS assessment, as it is universally available, and it allows a comprehensive structural and hemodynamic evaluation of both the aortic valve and the rest of the heart. However, it may not be sufficient as a significant proportion of patients with severe AS presents with discordant grading (i.e., an AVA ≤ 1 cm² and a mean gradient <40 mmHg) which raises uncertainty about the true severity of AS and the need for AVR. Several imaging modalities (transesophageal or stress echocardiography, computed tomography, cardiovascular magnetic resonance, positron emission tomography) exist that allow a detailed assessment of the stenotic aortic valve and the myocardial remodeling response. This review aims to provide an updated overview of these multimodality imaging techniques and seeks to highlight a practical approach to help clinical decision making in the challenging group of patients with discordant low-gradient AS.

Dimensionless Index in Patients With Low-Gradient Severe Aortic Stenosis and Preserved Ejection Fraction

Background

Risk stratification of patients with low-gradient (LG) severe aortic stenosis (AS) despite preserved left ventricular ejection fraction remains challenging. We sought to evaluate the relationship between the dimensionless index (DI)—the ratio of the left ventricular outflow tract time-velocity integral to that of the aortic valve jet—and mortality in these patients.

Methods

Seven hundred fifty-five patients with LG severe AS (defined by aortic valve area ≤1 cm 2 or aortic valve area indexed to body surface area ≤0.6 cm 2 /m 2 and mean aortic pressure gradient <40 mm Hg) and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50% were studied. Flow status was defined according to stroke volume index <35 mL/m 2 (low flow, LF) or ≥35 mL/m 2 (normal flow, NF).

Results

After adjustment for age, sex, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index, history of hypertension, history of atrial fibrillation, AS-related symptoms, left ventricular ejection fraction, indexed left ventricular ventricular mass, aortic valve area, and aortic valve replacement as a time-dependent covariate, patients with LG-LF and DI<0.25 exhibited a considerable increased risk of death compared with patients with LG-NF and DI≥0.25 (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.41 [95% CI, 1.61–3.62]; P <0.001), LG-NF and DI<0.25 (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.84 [95% CI, 1.24–2.73]; P =0.003), and LG-LF and D≥0.25 (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.27 [95% CI, 1.42–3.63]; P <0.001). In contrast, patients with LG-LF and DI≥0.25, LG-NF and DI<0.25, and LG-NF and DI≥0.25 had similar outcome. DI<0.25 showed incremental prognostic value in patients with LG-LF severe AS but not in patients with LG-NF severe AS.

Conclusions

Among patients with LG severe AS and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, decreased DI<0.25 is a reliable parameter in patients with LF to identify a subgroup of patients at higher risk of death who may derive benefit from aortic valve replacement.