Outcomes in Moderate Mixed Aortic Valve Disease: Is it Time for a Paradigm Shift?

Alterations in Left Atrial and Ventricular Coupling in Mixed Aortic Valve Disease

AIMS

To characterize left atrial (LA) and left ventricular (LV) function and atrioventricular (AV) coupling in patients with moderate mixed aortic valve disease (MMAVD) against those with isolated moderate or severe aortic valve disease and controls.

METHODS & RESULTS

Retrospective LA and LV peak longitudinal strain (LS) analysis were performed on 260 patients (46 MMAVD, 81 moderate aortic stenosis (AS), 50 severe AS, 48 moderate aortic regurgitation (AR), and 35 severe AR) and 66 controls. Peak LV and LA LS and AV coupling, assessed by combined peak LA and LV strain, was compared between the groups. ANOVA and 2-sided t-tests were used and a p-value of <0.01 was considered significant.LV strain was significantly lower in those with MMAVD compared to controls and those with moderate or severe isolated AR but comparable to those with moderate or severe AS (-17.1±1.1% MMAVD vs. -17.7±1.5% moderate AS p=0.02; vs. -17.0%±1.5% severe AS, p=0.74). AV coupling was significantly lower in those with MMAVD compared to controls and those with moderate AS or AR but comparable to those with severe AS or AR (47.1±6.8% MMAVD vs. 45.1±5.6% severe AS, p=0.13; vs. 50.4±9% severe AR, p=0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Impairments in AV coupling are comparable for patients with MMAVD and those with severe isolated AS or AR. Impairments in LV GLS in MMAVD mirror those found in severe AS. These findings suggest that haemodynamic consequences and adverse remodelling are similar for patients with MMAVD and isolated severe disease.

Management of bicuspid aortic valve disease in the transcatheter aortic valve implantation era

In an era of rapidly expanding use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), the management of patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease is far less well established than in those with trileaflet anatomy. Results of isolated surgical aortic valve replacement are excellent in suitable patients, and surgery also allows treatment of concomitant pathology of the aortic root and ascending aorta that is frequently encountered in this cohort. Conversely, TAVI provides an excellent alternative in older patients who may be unsuitable for surgery, although outcomes in BAV disease have only been reported in relatively small non-randomised series. Here, we discuss the pertinent literature on this topic and outline contemporary interventional treatment options in this challenging setting.

Left ventricular reverse remodeling after aortic valve replacement or repair in bicuspid aortic valve with moderate or greater aortic regurgitation

Objective

Bicuspid aortic valve (AV) patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) differ from tricuspid AV patients given younger age, greater left ventricle (LV) compliance, and more prevalent aortic stenosis (AS). Bicuspid AV-specific data to guide timing of AV replacement or repair are lacking.

Methods

Adults with bicuspid AV and moderate or greater AR who underwent aortic valve replacement or repair at our center were studied. The presurgical echocardiogram, and echocardiograms within 3 years postoperatively were evaluated for LV geometry/function, and AV function. Semiquantitative AS/AR assessment was performed in all patients with adequate imaging.

Results

One hundred thirty-five patients (85% men, aged 44.5 ± 15.9 years) were studied (63% pure AR, 37% mixed AS/AR). Following aortic valve replacement or repair, change in LV end-diastolic dimension and change in LV end-diastolic volume were associated with preoperative LV end-diastolic dimension (β = 0.62 Δcm/cm; 95% CI, 0.43-0.73 Δcm/cm; P < .001), and LV end-diastolic volume (β = 0.6 ΔmL/mL; 95% CI, 0.4-0.7 ΔmL/mL; P < .001), respectively, each independent of AR/AS severity (P = not significant). Baseline LV size predicted postoperative normalization (LV end-diastolic dimension: odds ratio, 3.75/cm; 95% CI, 1.61-8.75/cm, LV end-diastolic volume: odds ratio, 1.01/mL; 95% CI, 1.004-1.019/mL, both P values < .01) whereas AR/AS severity did not (P = not significant). Indexed LV end diastolic volume outperformed LV end-diastolic dimension in predicting postoperative LV normalization (area under the curve = 0.74 vs 0.61) with optimal diagnostic cutoffs of 99 mL/m2 and 6.1 cm, respectively. Postoperative indexed LV end diastolic volume dilatation was associated with increased risk of death, transplant/ventricular assist device, ventricular arrhythmia, and reoperation (hazard ratio, 6.1; 95% CI, 1.7-21.5; P < .01).

Conclusions

Remodeling extent following surgery in patients with bicuspid AV and AR relates to preoperative LV size independent of valve disease phenotype or severity. Many patients with LV end-diastolic dimension below current surgical thresholds did not normalize LV size. LV volumetric assessment offered superior diagnostic performance for predicting residual LV dilatation, and postoperative indexed LV end diastolic volume dilatation was associated with adverse prognosis.

Assess the Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Valve with Mixed Disease versus Predominant Aortic Stenosis

Purpose

In mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD), the results of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are conflicting. There is limited data on the outcomes of TAVR in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and MAVD. The objective of this study is to compare outcomes after TAVR in BAV patients with MAVD and predominant aortic stenosis (PAS).

Patients and Methods

Patients with BAV who underwent TAVR between January 2016 and April 2023 were included. The primary outcome was device success. The secondary endpoints were periprocedural mortality and other complications as defined by the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3). Propensity score matching was used to minimize potential confounding.

Results

A total of 262 patients were included in this study, 83 of whom had MAVD. The median age was 72 years, and 55.7% were male. The baseline comorbidity risk files were comparable between the two groups. Patients with MAVD had more mitral regurgitation, tricuspid regurgitation and pulmonary hypertension, larger annular and left ventricular outflow tract dimensions, and more severe calcification than PAS. In the unmatched population, MAVD patients had similar device success rate (69.9% vs 79.9%, P=0.075) and 30-day mortality (3.6% vs 3.4%, P=1) compared to PAS. Propensity score matching resulted in 66 patient pairs. Device success rate were still comparable in the matched population. Other clinical outcomes, including stroke, bleeding (type 2-4), major vascular complications, acute kidney injury (stage 2-4) and permanent pacemaker implantation, were comparable between the two groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis did not show MAVD to be an independent negative predictor of device success. At one year, survival was similar between patients with MAVD and those with PAS.

Conclusion

For the bicuspid valve, patients with MAVD had a more challenging anatomy. MAVD patients associated with comparable 30-day clinical outcomes after TAVR compared to PAS patients in patients with BAV.

Predictors of outcome in patients with moderate mixed aortic valve disease

OBJECTIVES

Grading the severity of moderate mixed aortic stenosis and regurgitation (MAVD) is challenging and the disease poorly understood. Identifying markers of haemodynamic severity will improve risk stratification and potentially guide timely treatment. This study aims to identify prognostic haemodynamic markers in patients with moderate MAVD.

METHODS

Moderate MAVD was defined as coexisting moderate aortic stenosis (aortic valve area (AVA) 1.0-1.5 cm2) and moderate aortic regurgitation (vena contracta (VC) 0.3-0.6 cm). Consecutive patients diagnosed between 2015 and 2019 were included from a multicentre registry. The primary composite outcome of death or heart failure hospitalisation was evaluated among these patients. Demographics, comorbidities, echocardiography and treatment data were assessed for their prognostic significance.

RESULTS

207 patients with moderate MAVD were included, aged 78 (66-84) years, 56% male sex, AVA 1.2 (1.1-1.4) cm2 and VC 0.4 (0.4-0.5) cm. Over a follow-up of 3.5 (2.5-4.7) years, the composite outcome was met in 89 patients (43%). Univariable associations with the primary outcome included older age, previous myocardial infarction, previous cerebrovascular event, atrial fibrillation, New York Heart Association >2, worse renal function, tricuspid regurgitation ≥2 and mitral regurgitation ≥2. Markers of biventricular systolic function, cardiac remodelling and transaortic valve haemodynamics demonstrated an inverse association with the primary composite outcome. In multivariable analysis, peak aortic jet velocity (Vmax) was independently and inversely associated with the composite outcome (HR: 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.93; p=0.021) in an adjusted model along with age (HR: 1.05, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.08; p<0.001), creatinine (HR: 1.002, 95% CI 1.001 to 1.003; p=0.005), previous cerebrovascular event (85% vs 42%; HR: 3.04, 95% CI 1.54 to 5.99; p=0.001) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (HR: 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99; p=0.007). Patients with Vmax ≤2.8 m/s and LVEF ≤50% (n=27) had the worst outcome compared with the rest of the population (72% vs 41%; HR: 3.87, 95% CI 2.20 to 6.80; p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with truly moderate MAVD have a high incidence of death and heart failure hospitalisation (43% at 3.5 (2.5-4.7) years). Within this group, a high-risk group characterised by disproportionately low aortic Vmax (≤2.8 m/s) and adverse remodelling (LVEF ≤50%) have the worst outcomes.

Impact of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement on Cardiac Reverse Remodeling and Prognosis in Mixed Aortic Valve Disease

BACKGROUND

The management of mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD), defined as the concomitant presence of aortic stenosis (AS) and aortic regurgitation, remains a clinical challenging. The present study assessed the impact of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) on cardiac geometry and prognosis in patients with MAVD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A retrospective multicenter TAVR registry was conducted, including patients who underwent TAVR for severe symptomatic AS between January 2015 and March 2019. Patients were subdivided into 2 groups according to concomitant presence of moderate or more severe aortic regurgitation as the MAVD group, and with mild or less severe aortic regurgitation as the isolated AS group. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death and rehospitalization due to cardiovascular causes. A total of 1742 patients (isolated AS, 1522 patients; MAVD, 220 patients) were included (84.0±5.2 years). Although MAVD exhibited significantly larger left ventricular volumes and higher left ventricular mass index at the TAVR procedure than isolated AS (respectively, P<0.001), MAVD showed a greater improvement of left ventricular volumes and left ventricular mass index after TAVR (respectively, P≤0.001). During a median follow-up of 747 days, 301 patients achieved the primary event. The prognosis post-TAVR was comparable between the 2 groups (log-rank P=0.65). Even after adjustment using propensity score matching to reduce the potential bias between the 2 groups, similar results were obtained for the entire cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite more advanced cardiac remodeling in MAVD at the time of TAVR compared with isolated AS, a greater improvement of cardiac reverse remodeling was found in MAVD, and the prognosis following TAVR was comparable between the 2 groups.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Therapy for Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become first-line treatment for older adults with severe aortic stenosis (AS), however, patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) have been traditionally excluded from randomised trials and guidelines. As familiarity and proficiency of TAVI operators have improved, case-series and observational data have demonstrated the feasibility of successful TAVI in bicuspid aortic valve aortic stenosis (BAV-AS), however, patients with BAV-AS have several distinct characteristics that influence the likelihood of TAVI success. This review aims to summarise the pathophysiology and classification of BAV, published safety data, anatomical challenges and procedural considerations essential for pre-procedural planning, patient selection and procedural success of TAVI in BAV.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Mixed Aortic Valve Disease: A Multicenter Study

Mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD), defined by the concurrent presence of aortic stenosis (AS) and insufficiency is frequently seen in patients who have undergone transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, studies comparing the outcomes of TAVI in MAVD versus isolated AS have demonstrated conflicting results. Therefore, we aim to assess the outcomes of TAVI in patients with MAVD in comparison with those with isolated severe AS. Patients who underwent native valve TAVI for severe AS at 3 tertiary care academic centers between January 2012 and December 2020 were included and categorized into 3 groups based on concomitant aortic insufficiency (AI) as follows: group 1, no AI; group 2, mild AI; and group 3, moderate to severe AI. Outcomes of interest included all-cause mortality and all-cause readmission rates at 30 days and 1 year. Other outcomes include bleeding, stroke, vascular complications, and the incidence of paravalvular leak at 30 days after the procedure. Of the 1,588 patients who underwent TAVI during the study period, 775 patients (49%) had isolated AS, 606 (38%) had mild AI, and 207 (13%) had moderate to severe AI. Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk scores were significantly different among the 3 groups (5% in group 1, 5.5% in group 2, and 6% in group 3, p = 0.003). Balloon-expandable valves were used in about 2/3 of the population. No statistically significant differences in 30-day or 1-year all-cause mortality and all-cause readmission rates were noted among the 3 groups. Post-TAVI paravalvular leak at follow-up was significantly lower in group 1 (2.3%) and group 2 (2%) compared with group 3 (5.6%) (p = 0.01). In summary, TAVI in MAVD is associated with comparable outcomes at 1 year compared with patients with isolated severe AS.

Clinical impact of aortic valve replacement in patients with moderate mixed aortic valve disease

Background

Information is scarce regarding the clinical implications of aortic valve replacement (AVR) for patients suffering from moderate mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD), characterized by a combination of moderate aortic stenosis (AS) and regurgitation (AR). The objective of this retrospective study was to explore the clinical effects of AVR in individuals with moderate MAVD.

Methods

We examined the clinical data from patients with moderate MAVD and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, who had undergone echocardiography in the period spanning from 2010 to 2018. Moderate AS was defined as aortic valve area index of 0.60-0.85 cm2/m2 and peak velocity of 3.0-4.0 m/s. Moderate AR was defined as a vena contracta width of 3.0-6.0 mm. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death and heart failure hospitalization.

Results

Among 88 patients (mean age, 74.4 ± 6.8 years; 48.9%, men), 44 (50.0%) required AVR during a median follow-up period of 3.3 years (interquartile range, 0.5-4.9). Mean values of specific aortic valve variables are as follows: aortic valve area index, 0.64 ± 0.04 cm2/m2; peak velocity, 3.40 ± 0.30 m/s; and vena contracta width, 4.1 ± 0.7 mm. The primary endpoint occurred in 32 (36.4%) patients during a median follow-up duration of 5.3 years (interquartile range, 3.2-8.0). Multivariable analysis revealed that AVR was significantly associated with the endpoint (hazard ratio, 0.248; 95% confidence interval, 0.107-0.579; p = 0.001) after adjusting for age, B-type natriuretic peptide, and the Charlson comorbidity index. Patients who underwent AVR during follow-up had significantly lower incidence rates of the endpoint than those managed with medical treatment (10.2% vs. 44.1% at 5 years; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Approximately half of the patients diagnosed with moderate MAVD eventually necessitated AVR throughout the period of observation, leading to positive clinical results. Vigilant tracking of these patients and watchful monitoring for signs requiring AVR during this time frame are essential.

Prognostic utility of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide ratio in mixed aortic valve disease

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the incremental prognostic value of N-terminal-pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (Nt-proBNP) for risk stratification in mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) patients.

METHODS

We included 556 (73±12 years, 37% women) consecutive patients with at least a moderate aortic stenosis (AS) or aortic regurgitation (AR) lesion with a concomitant AS or AR of any severity in whom Nt-proBNP was measured and expressed as its ratio (measured Nt-proBNP divided by the upper limit of normal Nt-proBNP for age and sex). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Baseline median Nt-proBNP ratio was 3.8 (IQR: 1.5-11.3), and the median follow-up was 5.6 years (4.8-6.1). Early aortic valve replacement (AVR) was performed within 3 months in 423 (76%) patients, while 133 (24%) remained initially under medical treatment. In comprehensive multivariable analyses, Nt-proBNP ratio was significantly associated with excess mortality (continuous variable: HR (95% CI): 1.24 (1.04 to 1.47), p=0.02; Nt-proBNP ratio ≥3: 2.41 (1.33 to 4.39), p=0.004). The independent prognostic value was also observed in patients with severe or non-severe AS/AR, and those treated by early-AVR (all p<0.04). Nt-proBNP ratio as continuous and dichotomic (≥3) variables showed incremental prognostic value (all net reclassification index >0.42, all p≤0.008). After early-AVR, Nt-proBNP ratio ≥3 was associated with higher 30-day mortality (9 (4%) vs 1 (0.5%), p=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In this series of MAVD patients, Nt-proBNP ratio was a powerful predictor of early and long-term mortality, even in patients with both non-severe AS/AR. Moreover, early-AVR may be an option for patients with Nt-proBNP ratio ≥3. Further randomised studies are needed to validate this last point.

Left ventricular adaptation to aortic regurgitation in adults with repaired coarctation of aorta

BACKGROUND

Aortic regurgitation (AR) can develop in adults with repaired coarctation of aorta (COA), but there are limited data about left ventricular (LV) remodeling and clinical outcomes in this population. The purpose of the study was to compare LV remodeling (LV mass index [LVMI], LV ejection fraction [LVEF], and septal E/e') and onset of symptoms before aortic valve replacement, and LV reverse remodeling (%-change in LVMI, LVEF and E/e') after aortic valve replacement in patients with versus without repaired COA presenting with AR.

METHODS

Asymptomatic adults with repaired COA presenting with moderate/severe AR (AR-COA group) were matched 1:2 to asymptomatic adults without COA and similar severity of AR (control group).

RESULTS

Although both groups (AR-COA n = 52, and control n = 104) had similar age, sex, body mass index, aortic valve gradient, and AR severity, the AR-COA group had higher LVMI (124 ± 28 versus 102 ± 25 g/m², p < 0.001) and E/e' (12.3 ± 2.3 versus 9.5 ± 2.1, p = 0.02) but similar LVEF (63 ± 9% versus 67 ± 10%, p = 0.4). COA diagnosis (adjusted HR 1.95, 95%CI 1.49-2.37, p < 0.001), older age, E/e', and LV hypertrophy were associated with onset of symptoms. Of 89 patients (AR-COA n = 41, and control n = 48) with echocardiographic data at 1-year post- aortic valve replacement, the AR-COA group had less regression of LVMI (-8% [95%CI -5 to -11] versus -17% [95%CI -15 to -21], p < 0.001) and E/e' (-5% [95% CI -3 to -7] versus -16% [95% CI -13 to -19], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with COA and AR had a more aggressive clinical course, and perhaps may require a different threshold for surgical intervention.

Comparative Outcomes of TAVR in Mixed Aortic Valve Disease and Aortic Stenosis: A Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a suitable alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for the treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS). A high proportion of patients with AS have mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) with mild or more concurrent aortic regurgitation (AR). Differential outcomes of TAVR among patients with AS and MAVD have not been well characterized. We compared 1-year mortalities following TAVR among patients with MAVD and AS.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis of studies published in PubMed/Medline. The primary outcome was 1-year all-cause mortality following TAVR among patients with MAVD vs. AS. Secondary endpoints were: (1) incidence of AR within 30 days following TAVR (post TAVR AR); and (2) 1-year all-cause mortality within each group stratified according to severity of post TAVR AR.

RESULTS

Nine studies involving 9505 participants were included in the analysis. At 1 year following TAVR, mortality was lower in MAVD than in AS; HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81-0.98. The mortality advantage increased when pre-TAVR AR was moderate or more; HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.99. The mortality advantage was attenuated after correction for publication bias. There was a higher risk of post TAVR AR in the MAVD group; OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.20-1.90 but the impact on mortality of moderate vs. mild post TAVR AR was greater among patients with AS than in patients with MAVD HR 1.67 95% CI 0.89-3.14 vs. 0.93 95% CI 0.47-1.85.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with MAVD have similar or improved survival 1 year after TAVR compared to those with AS.

TAVR in 2023: Who Should Not Get It?

Since the first transcatheter delivery of an aortic valve prosthesis was performed by Cribier et al in 2002, the picture of aortic stenosis (AS) therapeutics has changed dramatically. Initiated from an indication of inoperable to high surgical risk, extending to intermediate and low risk, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is now an approved treatment for patients with severe, symptomatic AS across all the risk categories. The current evidence supports TAVR as a frontline therapy for treating severe AS. The crucial question remains concerning the subset of patients who still are not ideal candidates for TAVR because of certain inherent anatomic, nonmodifiable, and procedure-specific factors. Therefore, in this study, we focus on these scenarios and reasons for referring selected patients for surgical aortic valve replacement in 2023.

Mixed aortic stenosis and regurgitation: a clinical conundrum

Mixed aortic stenosis (AS) and aortic regurgitation (AR) is the most frequent concomitant valve disease worldwide and represents a heterogeneous population ranging from mild AS with severe AR to mild AR with severe AS. About 6.8% of patients with at least moderate AS will also have moderate or greater AR, and 17.9% of patients with at least moderate AR will suffer from moderate or greater AS. Interest in mixed AS/AR has increased, with studies demonstrating that patients with moderate mixed AS/AR have similar outcomes to those with isolated severe AS. The diagnosis and quantification of mixed AS/AR severity are predominantly echocardiography-based, but the combined lesions lead to significant limitations in the assessment. Aortic valve peak velocity is the best parameter to evaluate the combined haemodynamic impact of both lesions, with a peak velocity greater than 4.0 m/s suggesting severe mixed AS/AR. Moreover, symptoms, increased left ventricular wall thickness and filling pressures, and abnormal left ventricular global longitudinal strain likely identify high-risk patients who may benefit from closer follow-up. Although guidelines recommend interventions based on the predominant lesion, some patients could potentially benefit from earlier intervention. Once a patient is deemed to require intervention, for patients receiving transcatheter valves, the presence of mixed AS/AR could confer benefit to those at high risk of paravalvular leak. Overall, the current approach of managing patients based on the dominant lesion might be too reductionist and a more holistic approach including biomarkers and multimodality imaging cardiac remodelling and inflammation data might be more appropriate.

Recommendations for the Use of Echocardiography in the Evaluation of Rheumatic Heart Disease: A Report from the American Society of Echocardiography

Acute rheumatic fever and its chronic sequela, rheumatic heart disease (RHD), pose major health problems globally, and remain the most common cardiovascular disease in children and young people worldwide. Echocardiography is the most important diagnostic tool in recognizing this preventable and treatable disease and plays an invaluable role in detecting the presence of subclinical disease needing prompt therapy or follow-up assessment. This document provides recommendations for the comprehensive use of echocardiography in the diagnosis and therapeutic intervention of RHD. Echocardiographic diagnosis of RHD is made when typical findings of valvular and subvalvular abnormalities are seen, including commissural fusion, leaflet thickening, and restricted leaflet mobility, with varying degrees of calcification. The mitral valve is predominantly affected, most often leading to mitral stenosis. Mixed valve disease and associated cardiopulmonary pathology are common. The severity of valvular lesions and hemodynamic effects on the cardiac chambers and pulmonary artery pressures should be rigorously examined. It is essential to take advantage of all available modalities of echocardiography to obtain accurate anatomic and hemodynamic details of the affected valve lesion(s) for diagnostic and strategic pre-treatment planning. Intraprocedural echocardiographic guidance is critical during catheter-based or surgical treatment of RHD, as is echocardiographic surveillance for post-intervention complications or disease progression. The role of echocardiography is indispensable in the entire spectrum of RHD management.

Imaging, Treatment Options, Patient Selection, and Outcome Considerations for Patients With Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement has emerged as a safe and effective alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis across the spectrum of surgical risks based on a series of foundational randomized clinical trials. Of note, patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease were excluded from all these pivotal randomized trials, leaving a significant knowledge gap because BAVs are commonly encountered in patients referred for aortic valve surgery or intervention. In this comprehensive review, we aim to provide heart teams with a detailed insight into how to approach patients with BAV disease, focusing on imaging and characterization of bicuspid valves, an overview of surgical approaches, and an understanding of the current data behind the role of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for patients with BAV disease.

Aortic Stenosis: New Insights in Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention

Aortic stenosis (AS) is one of the most common valvular heart diseases and the number of patients with AS is expected to increase globally as the older population is growing fast. Since the majority of patients are elderly, AS is no longer a simple valvular heart disease of left ventricular outflow obstruction but is accompanied by other cardiac and comorbid conditions. Because of the significant variations of the disease, identifying patients at high risk and even earlier detection of patients with AS before developing symptomatic severe AS is becoming increasingly important. With the proven of efficacy and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in the severe AS population, there is a growing interest in applying TAVR in those with less than severe AS. A medical therapy to reduce or prevent the progression in AS is actively investigated by several randomized control trials. In this review, we will summarize the most recent findings in AS and discuss potential future management strategies of patients with AS.

Impact of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction on Clinical Outcomes in Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease

BACKGROUND

The prognostic impact of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease has not been previously studied.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to determine the prognostic impact of LVEF in BAV patients according to the type of aortic valve dysfunction.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data collected in 2,672 patients included in an international registry of patients with BAV. Patients were classified according to the type of aortic valve dysfunction: isolated aortic stenosis (AS) (n = 749), isolated aortic regurgitation (AR) (n = 554), mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) (n = 190), or no significant aortic valve dysfunction (n = 1,179; excluded from this analysis). The study population was divided according to LVEF strata to investigate its impact on clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

The risk of all-cause mortality and the composite endpoint of aortic valve replacement or repair (AVR) and all-cause mortality increased when LVEF was <60% in the whole cohort as well as in the AS and AR groups, and when LVEF was <55% in MAVD group. In multivariable analysis, LVEF strata were significantly associated with increased rate of mortality (LVEF 50%-59%: HR: 1.83 [95% CI: 1.09-3.07]; P = 0.022; LVEF 30%-49%: HR: 1.97 [95% CI: 1.13-3.41]; P = 0.016; LVEF <30%: HR: 4.20 [95% CI: 2.01-8.75]; P < 0.001; vs LVEF 60%-70%, reference group).

CONCLUSIONS

In BAV patients, the risk of adverse clinical outcomes increases significantly when the LVEF is <60%. These findings suggest that LVEF cutoff values proposed in the guidelines to indicate intervention should be raised from 50% to 60% in AS or AR and 55% in MAVD.

Prognostic relevance of B-type natriuretic peptide in patients with moderate mixed aortic valve disease

AIMS

Data on B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels and adverse outcomes in patients with moderate mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD), defined as moderate aortic stenosis (AS) and regurgitation (AR), are scarce. Therefore, this study investigated the impact of BNP on the clinical outcomes in such patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Clinical data from 81 patients (mean age, 74.1 ± 6.8 years; 50.6%, men) treated for moderate MAVD and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 50% during 2010-2018 were retrospectively analysed. Specific echocardiographic data of the study patients were LVEF of 57.8 ± 5.0%, aortic valve index of 0.64 ± 0.04 cm2 /m2 , peak aortic valve velocity of 3.38 ± 0.29 m/s, and AR vena contracta width of 4.2 ± 0.7 mm. The median BNP level was 61.4 pg/mL (interquartile range, 29.7-109.9). The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, heart failure hospitalization, and aortic valve replacement, and its cumulative incidence at 5 years was 57.7%. Multivariable analysis revealed that age (hazard ratio, 1.079; 95% confidence interval, 1.028-1.133; P = 0.002) and BNP levels (hazard ratio, 1.028; 95% confidence interval, 1.003-1.053; P = 0.027) were significantly related to the endpoint; specifically, BNP > 61.4 pg/mL had significantly higher incidence rates of the endpoint than those with a BNP ≤ 61.4 pg/mL (70.3% vs. 45.5% at 5 years; P = 0.018). Compared with patients with BNP ≤ 61.4 pg/mL, those with BNP > 61.4 pg/mL had significantly worse left ventricular global longitudinal strain (-17.1 ± 3.6% vs. -18.7 ± 2.6%; P = 0.029), along with higher left ventricular mass index (116.9 ± 27.8 g/m2 vs. 103.5 ± 19.7 g/m2 ; P = 0.014), relative wall thickness (0.45 ± 0.07 vs. 0.42 ± 0.05; P = 0.022), left atrial volume index (46.0 ± 28.4 mL/m2 vs. 31.4 ± 10.3 mL/m2 ; P = 0.003), pulmonary artery systolic pressure (32.6 ± 9.7 mmHg vs. 28.2 ± 4.7 mmHg; P = 0.011), and prevalence of moderate or greater tricuspid regurgitation (15.0% vs. 0.0%; P = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with moderate MAVD are at higher risk of unfavourable clinical outcomes, and age and BNP are independently related to the occurrence of adverse events. High BNP levels may reflect extravalvular cardiac damage in patients with moderate MAVD.

The Technological Basis of a Balloon-Expandable TAVR System: Non-occlusive Deployment, Anchorage in the Absence of Calcification and Polymer Leaflets

Leaflet durability and costs restrict contemporary trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) largely to elderly patients in affluent countries. TAVR that are easily deployable, avoid secondary procedures and are also suitable for younger patients and non-calcific aortic regurgitation (AR) would significantly expand their global reach. Recognizing the reduced need for post-implantation pacemakers in balloon-expandable (BE) TAVR and the recent advances with potentially superior leaflet materials, a trans-catheter BE-system was developed that allows tactile, non-occlusive deployment without rapid pacing, direct attachment of both bioprosthetic and polymer leaflets onto a shape-stabilized scallop and anchorage achieved by plastic deformation even in the absence of calcification. Three sizes were developed from nickel-cobalt-chromium MP35N alloy tubes: Small/23 mm, Medium/26 mm and Large/29 mm. Crimp-diameters of valves with both bioprosthetic (sandwich-crosslinked decellularized pericardium) and polymer leaflets (triblock polyurethane combining siloxane and carbonate segments) match those of modern clinically used BE TAVR. Balloon expansion favors the wing-structures of the stent thereby creating supra-annular anchors whose diameter exceeds the outer diameter at the waist level by a quarter. In the pulse duplicator, polymer and bioprosthetic TAVR showed equivalent fluid dynamics with excellent EOA, pressure gradients and regurgitation volumes. Post-deployment fatigue resistance surpassed ISO requirements. The radial force of the helical deployment balloon at different filling pressures resulted in a fully developed anchorage profile of the valves from two thirds of their maximum deployment diameter onwards. By combining a unique balloon-expandable TAVR system that also caters for non-calcific AR with polymer leaflets, a powerful, potentially disruptive technology for heart valve disease has been incorporated into a TAVR that addresses global needs. While fulfilling key prerequisites for expanding the scope of TAVR to the vast number of patients of low- to middle income countries living with rheumatic heart disease the system may eventually also bring hope to patients of high-income countries presently excluded from TAVR for being too young.

Aortic regurgitation management: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and recommendations

Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of aortic regurgitation (AR) contain recommendations that do not always match. We systematically reviewed clinical practice guidelines and summarized similarities and differences in the recommendations as well as gaps in evidence on the management of AR. We searched MEDLINE and Embase (1 January 2011 to 1 September 2021), Google Scholar, and websites of relevant organizations for contemporary guidelines that were rigorously developed as assessed by the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool. Three guidelines met our inclusion criteria. There was consensus on the definition of severe AR and use of echocardiography and of multimodality imaging for diagnosis, with emphasis on comprehensive assessment by the heart valve team to assess suitability and choice of intervention. Surgery is indicated in all symptomatic patients and aortic valve replacement is the cornerstone of treatment. There is consistency in the frequency of follow-up of patients, and safety of non-cardiac surgery in patients without indications for surgery. Discrepancies exist in recommendations for 3D imaging and the use of global longitudinal strain and biomarkers. Cut-offs for left ventricular ejection fraction and size for recommending surgery in severe asymptomatic AR also vary. There are no specific AR cut-offs for high-risk surgery and the role of percutaneous intervention is yet undefined. Recommendations on the treatment of mixed valvular disease are sparse and lack robust prospective data.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in mixed aortic valve disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Utilization of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has expanded from high-risk patients to intermediate- and select low-risk candidates with severe aortic stenosis (AS). TAVR is currently not indicated for patients with aortic insufficiency, and its outcomes in mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) are unclear.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Medline, CINHAL, and Cochrane databases was performed to identify studies comparing TAVR outcomes in patients with AS vs. MAVD. Primary outcomes included 30-day and late all-cause mortality, and paravalvular regurgitation (PVR). Secondary outcomes were major bleeding, vascular complications, device implantation success, permanent pacemaker, and stroke. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Der Simonian-Laird random-effects model.

RESULTS

Six observational studies with 58 879 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in 30-day all-cause mortality [OR 1.03 (95% CI 0.92-1.15); P = 0.63], however, MAVD group had higher odds of moderate-to-severe PVR [1.81 (1.41-2.31); P < 0.01]. MAVD patients had lower odds of device implantation success [0.60 (0.40-0.91); P = 0.02] while other secondary outcomes were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR in MAVD is associated with increased odds of paravalvular regurgitation and lower odds of device implantation success when compared to severe aortic stenosis.

Left ventricular remodelling in bicuspid aortic valve disease

AIMS

Characterization of left ventricular (LV) geometric pattern and LV mass could provide an important insight into the pathophysiological adaptations of the LV to pressure and/or volume overload in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and significant (≥moderate) aortic valve (AV) disease. This study aimed to characterize LV remodelling and its prognostic impact in patients with BAV according to the predominant type of valvular dysfunction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this international, multicentre BAV registry, 1345 patients [51.0 (37.0-63.0) years, 71% male] with significant AV disease were identified. Patients were classified as having isolated aortic stenosis (AS) (n = 669), isolated aortic regurgitation (AR) (n = 499) or mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) (n = 177). LV hypertrophy was defined as a LV mass index >115 g/m2 in males and >95 g/m2 in females. LV geometric pattern was classified as (i) normal geometry: no LV hypertrophy, relative wall thickness (RWT) ≤0.42, (ii) concentric remodelling: no LV hypertrophy, RWT >0.42, (iii) concentric hypertrophy: LV hypertrophy, RWT >0.42, and (iv) eccentric hypertrophy: LV hypertrophy, RWT ≤0.42. Patients were followed-up for the endpoints of event-free survival (defined as a composite of AV repair/replacement and all-cause mortality) and all-cause mortality. Type of AV dysfunction was related to significant variations in LV remodelling. Higher LV mass index, i.e. LV hypertrophy, was independently associated with the composite endpoint for patients with isolated AS [hazard ratio (HR) 1.08 per 25 g/m2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00-1.17, P = 0.046] and AR (HR 1.19 per 25 g/m2, 95% CI 1.11-1.29, P < 0.001), but not for those with MAVD. The presence of concentric remodelling, concentric hypertrophy and eccentric hypertrophy were independently related to the composite endpoint in patients with isolated AS (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.06-2.23, P = 0.024; HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.17-2.42, P = 0.005; HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.03-2.45, P = 0.038, respectively), while concentric hypertrophy and eccentric hypertrophy were independently associated with the combined endpoint for those with isolated AR (HR 2.49, 95% CI 1.35-4.60, P = 0.004 and HR 3.05, 95% CI 1.71-5.45, P < 0.001, respectively). There was no independent association observed between LV remodelling and the combined endpoint for patients with MAVD.

CONCLUSIONS

LV hypertrophy or remodelling were independently associated with the composite endpoint of AV repair/replacement and all-cause mortality for patients with isolated AS and isolated AR, although not for patients with MAVD.

Cardiac Remodeling and Disease Progression in Patients With Repaired Coarctation of Aorta and Aortic Stenosis

BACKGROUND

Valvulo-arterial impedance (Zva) is used for assessment of left ventricular (LV) global pressure load in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and impaired arterial compliance. Because patients with repaired coarctation of aorta (COA) have impaired arterial compliance, we hypothesized that COA patients with greater than or equal to moderate AS (AS-COA group) will have higher Zva, symptomatic progression, and cardiovascular events, as compared to non-COA patients with similar AS severity (AS group).

METHODS

Propensity matching (1:1) of 71 AS-COA and 71 AS patients based on age, sex, body mass index, and aortic valve mean gradient (cohort 1). Of 172 patients, 117 patients (AS-COA [n=62]; AS [n=55]) underwent aortic valve replacement, cohort 2. Cohort 1 was used to assess the relationship between preoperative Zva, cardiac remodeling, and symptomatic progression, while cohort 2 was used to assess the relationship between postoperative Zva, LV mass index regression (reduction in LV mass index after aortic valve replacement), and cardiovascular events.

RESULTS

The AS-COA group had higher Zva (4.2±0.6 versus 3.5±0.4 mm Hg/mL·m², P<0.001), more advanced cardiac remodeling, and higher 5-year incidence of symptomatic progression (85% versus 51%, P<0.001). Preoperative Zva was independently associated with cardiac remodeling (r=0.66, P<0.001) and symptomatic progression (hazard ratio, 1.06 [1.02-1.10], per mm Hg/mL·m² increase in Zva). The AS-COA group had higher postoperative Zva (3.3±0.5 versus 2.4±0.4 mm Hg/mL·m², P<0.001), less robust LV mass index regression at 1-year post-aortic valve replacement, and higher 5-year incidence of cardiovascular events. Postoperative Zva was independently associated with LV mass index regression (r=-0.46, P<0.001) and cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 1.06 [1.02-1.10], per mm Hg/mL·m² increase in Zva).

CONCLUSIONS

Adults with AS-COA had higher LV global pressure load, cardiac remodeling, symptomatic progression, and cardiovascular events as compared to non-COA patients with similar severity of AS. Zva can identify patients at risk for adverse outcomes, and perhaps should be used for risk stratification with regards to timing of aortic valve replacement.

When Aortic Stenosis Is Not Alone: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Diagnosis and Management in Mixed and Combined Valvular Disease

Aortic stenosis (AS) may present frequently combined with other valvular diseases or mixed with aortic regurgitation, with peculiar physio-pathological and clinical implications. The hemodynamic interactions between AS in mixed or combined valve disease depend on the specific combination of valve lesions and may result in diagnostic pitfalls at echocardiography; other imaging modalities may be helpful. Indeed, diagnosis is challenging because several echocardiographic methods commonly used to assess stenosis or regurgitation have been validated only in patients with the single-valve disease. Moreover, in the developed world, patients with multiple valve diseases tend to be older and more fragile over time; also, when more than one valvular lesion needs to address the surgical risk rises together with the long-term risk of morbidity and mortality associated with multiple valve prostheses, and the likelihood and risk of reoperation. Therefore, when AS presents mixed or combined valve disease, the heart valve team must integrate various parameters into the diagnosis and management strategy, including suitability for single or multiple transcatheter valve procedures. This review aims to summarize the most critical pathophysiological mechanisms underlying AS when associated with mitral regurgitation, mitral stenosis, aortic regurgitation, and tricuspid regurgitation. We will focus on echocardiography, clinical implications, and the most important treatment strategies.

Treatment of Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis Using Transcatheter Heart Valves

The paucity of data regarding the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) anatomy due to exclusion from pivotal studies and lack of studies assessing the long-term outcomes and valve performance continue to present a significant challenge as we expand TAVR to patients with BAV anatomy. This article discusses the important anatomic and clinical considerations in the selection and management of patients with BAV with TAVR and reviews the emerging evidence that increasingly suggests this procedure is safe, device success is excellent, and procedural outcomes are improving.

Characteristics of Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease and Stenosis: The National Echo Database of Australia

Background

Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most common congenital heart disease in adults but is clinically heterogeneous. We aimed to describe the echocardiographic characteristics of BAV and compare patients with BAV with moderate‐to‐severe aortic stenosis (AS) with those with tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) stenosis.

Methods and Results

Using the National Echo Database of Australia, patients in whom BAV was identified were studied. Those with moderate‐to‐severe AS (mean gradient >20 mm Hg [BAV‐AS]) were compared with those with TAV and moderate‐to‐severe AS (TAV‐AS). Of 264 159 adults whose aortic valve morphology was specified, 4783 (1.8%) had confirmed BAV (aged 49.6±17.4 years, 69% men). Of these, 42% had no AS, and 46% had no aortic regurgitation. Moderate‐to‐severe AS was detected in a greater proportion of patients with BAV with a recorded mean gradient (n=1112, 34%) compared with those with TAV (n=4377, 4%; P<0.001). Patients with BAV‐AS were younger (aged 55.3±16.7 years versus 77.3±11.0 years; P<0.001), and where measured had larger ascending aortic diameters (37±8 mm versus 35±5 mm; P<0.001). Age and sex‐adjusted mortality risk was significantly lower in patients with BAV‐AS (hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.45–0.63; P<0.001).

Conclusions

In this large study of patients across the spectrum of BAV disease, the largest proportion had no significant valvulopathy or aortopathy. Compared with those with TAV‐AS, patients with BAV were more likely to have moderate‐to‐severe AS, have larger ascending aortas, and were over 2 decades younger at the time of AS diagnosis. Despite this, patients with BAV appear to have a more favorable prognosis when AS develops, compared with those with TAV‐AS.

Registration

URL: www.anzctr.org.au/; Unique identifier: ACTRN12617001387314.

Implications of Coexisting Aortic Regurgitation in Patients With Aortic Stenosis

Background

Aortic regurgitation (AR) is a common comorbidity in patients with aortic stenosis (AS), but coexisting AR has often been excluded from major clinical studies on AS. The impact of coexisting AR on the natural history of AS has not been well-described.

Objectives

The authors compared clinical outcomes in medically managed patients with moderate-to-severe AS with or without coexisting AR.

Methods

Consecutive patients (N = 1,188) with index echocardiographic diagnosis of moderate-to-severe AS (aortic valve area <1.5 cm²) were studied. All patients were medically managed and were divided into those with coexisting AR (at least moderate severity) and those without. Adverse composite clinical outcomes were defined as mortality or admissions for congestive cardiac failure on subsequent follow-up. The authors compared differences in clinical profile and outcomes between the groups.

Results

There were 88 patients (7.4%) with coexisting AR and AS. These patients did not differ significantly in age, but had lower body mass index (22.9 ± 3.8 vs 25.3 ± 5.1 kg/m²), lower diastolic blood pressure (68.7 ± 10.7 vs 72.2 ± 12.3 mm Hg), larger end-diastolic volume index (68.8 ± 18.8 vs 60.4 ± 17.8 mL/m²) and larger left ventricular mass index (118.6 ± 36.4 vs 108.9 ± 33.1 g/m²). The prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors did not differ significantly. Coexisting AR was associated with increased incidence of adverse outcomes (log-rank 4.20; P = 0.040). On multivariable Cox regression, coexisting AR remained independently associated with adverse outcomes (HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.02-1.82) after adjusting for age, AS severity, left ventricular ejection fraction, and year of study.

Conclusions

In patients with AS, coexisting AR was associated with changes in echocardiographic profile and adverse outcomes.

Left Ventricular Longitudinal Strain in Characterization and Outcome Assessment of Mixed Aortic Valve Disease Phenotypes

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to characterize the interplay between mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) phenotypes (defined by concomitant severities of aortic stenosis and aortic regurgitation) and left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LV-GLS), and to assess the prognostic utility of LV-GLS in MAVD.

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the way LV-GLS separates MAVD phenotypes and if it is associated with their outcomes.

METHODS

This observational cohort study evaluated 783 consecutive adult patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50% and MAVD, which was defined as coexisting with at least moderate aortic stenosis and at least moderate aortic regurgitation. We measured the conventional echocardiographic variables and average LV-GLS from apical long, 2- and 4-chamber views. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients was 69 ± 15 years, and 58% were male. Mean LV-GLS was -14.7 ± 2.9%. In total, 458 patients (59%) underwent aortic valve replacement at a median period of 50 days (25th to 75th percentile range: 6 to 560 days). During a median follow-up period of 5.6 years (25th to 75th percentile range: 1.8 to 9.4 years), 391 patients (50%) died. When stratified patients into tertiles according to LV-GLS values, patients with worse LV-GLS had worse outcomes (p < 0.001). LV-GLS was independently associated with mortality (hazard ratio: 1.09; 95% confidential intervals: 1.04 to 1.14; p < 0.001), with the relationship between LV-GLS and mortality being linear.

CONCLUSIONS

LV-GLS is associated with all-cause mortality. LV-GLS may be useful for risk stratification in patients with MAVD.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis

After 15 years of successive randomized, controlled trials, indications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are rapidly expanding. In the coming years, this procedure could become the first line treatment for patients with a symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and a tricuspid aortic valve anatomy. However, randomized, controlled trials have excluded bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), which is the most frequent congenital heart disease occurring in 1% to 2% of the total population and representing at least 25% of patients 80 years of age or older referred for aortic valve replacement. The use of a less invasive transcatheter therapy in this elderly population became rapidly attractive, and approximately 10% of patients currently undergoing TAVR have a BAV. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the "European Conformity" have approved TAVR for low-risk patients regardless of the aortic valve anatomy whereas international guidelines recommend surgical replacement in BAV populations. Given this progressive expansion of TAVR toward younger and lower-risk patients, heart teams are encountering BAV patients more frequently, while the ability of this therapy to treat such a challenging anatomy remains uncertain. This review will address the singularity of BAV anatomy and associated technical challenges for the TAVR procedure. We will examine and summarize available clinical evidence and highlight critical knowledge gaps regarding TAVR utilization in BAV patients. We will provide a comprehensive overview of the role of computed tomography scans in the diagnosis, and classification of BAV and TAVR procedure planning. Overall, we will offer an integrated framework for understanding the current role of TAVR in the treatment of bicuspid aortic stenosis and for guiding physicians in clinical decision-making.

2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This executive summary of the valvular heart disease guideline provides recommendations for clinicians to diagnose and manage valvular heart disease as well as supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 1, 2010, to March 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Reports, and other selected database relevant to this guideline. Structure: Many recommendations from the earlier valvular heart disease guidelines have been updated with new evidence and provides newer options for diagnosis and treatment of valvular heart disease. This summary includes only the recommendations from the full guideline which focus on diagnostic work-up, the timing and choice of surgical and catheter interventions, and recommendations for medical therapy. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in developing these guidelines.

The Role of Extravalvular Cardiac Damage Staging in Aortic Valve Disease Management

Current management of patients with aortic valve disease, including aortic valve stenosis (AS), aortic valve regurgitation (AR), and mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD), remains challenging. American and European guideline recommendations regarding the timing of intervention are mainly based on the assessment of disease severity (ie, grading), presence of symptoms related to aortic valve disease, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, or LV enlargement. Furthermore, the decision regarding the type of intervention (ie, surgical vs transcatheter) is primarily based on risk assessment from surgical risk scores. There is, however, less emphasis on the importance of the assessment of anatomic and functional cardiac repercussions of aortic valve disease to guide the clinical management of these patients. Recently, a novel approach has been proposed to improve the management of aortic valve disease with 2 main components for risk stratification of the disease: 1) grading the severity of aortic valve disease, and 2) staging the extent of extravalvular cardiac damage associated with aortic valve disease with the use of echocardiography. To date, this novel approach of extravalvular cardiac damage staging was proposed and validated only in the context of AS but could be extended to other valvular heart diseases, including AR and MAVD. Further studies are also needed to test the incremental value of additional imaging parameters (eg, myocardial fibrosis by magnetic resonance) as well as blood biomarkers (eg, natriuretic peptide, cardiac troponin, and others) to the existing cardiac damage staging schemes.

Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for patients with severe aortic stenosis and concomitant aortic insufficiency: Insights from the TVT Registry

AIMS

Data regarding outcomes for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) with concomitant aortic insufficiency (AI), undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are limited. This study aimed to analyze the prevalence of severe AS with concomitant AI among patients undergoing TAVR and outcomes of TAVR in this patient group.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using data from the STS/ACC-TVT Registry, we identified patients with severe AS with or without concomitant AI who underwent TAVR between 2011 and 2016. Patients were categorized based on the severity of pre-procedural AI. Multivariable proportional hazards regression models were used to examine all-cause mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization at 1-year. Among 54,535 patients undergoing TAVR, 42,568 (78.1%) had severe AS with concomitant AI. Device success was lower in patients with severe AS with concomitant AI as compared with isolated AS. The presence of baseline AI was associated with lower 1 year mortality (HR 0.94 per 1 grade increase in AI severity; 95% CI, 0.91-0.98, P < .001) and HF hospitalization (HR 0.87 per 1 grade increase in AI severity; 95% CI, 0.84-0.91, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Severe AS with concomitant AI is common among patients undergoing TAVR, and is associated with lower 1 year mortality and HF hospitalization. Future studies are warranted to better understand the mechanisms underlying this benefit.

SHORT ABSTRACT

In this nationally representative analysis from the United States, 78.1% of patients undergoing TAVR had severe AS with concomitant AI. Device success was lower in patients with severe AS with concomitant AI as compared with isolated AS. The presence of baseline AI was associated with lower 1 year mortality (HR 0.94 per 1 grade increase in AI severity; 95% CI, 0.91-0.98, P < .001) and HF hospitalization (HR 0.87 per 1 grade increase in AI severity; 95% CI, 0.84-0.91, P < .001).

Early Valve Replacement for Severe Aortic Valve Disease: Effect on Mortality and Clinical Ramifications

Timing of aortic valve intervention for chronic aortic regurgitation (AR) and/or aortic stenosis (AS) potentially affects long-term survival. The 2014 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC) guidelines provide recommendations for the timing of intervention. Subsequent to the guidelines' release, several studies have been published that suggest a survival benefit from earlier timing of surgery for severe AR and/or AS. The aim of this review was to determine whether patients who have chronic aortic regurgitation (AR) and/or aortic stenosis (AS) have a survival benefit from earlier timing of aortic valve surgery. Medical databases were systematically searched from January 2015 to April 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that examined the timing of aortic valve replacement surgery for chronic AR and/or AS. For chronic AR, four observational studies and no RCTs were identified. For chronic AS, five observational studies, one RCT and one meta-analysis were identified. One observational study examining mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) was identified. All of these studies, for AR, AS, and MAVD, found long-term survival benefit from timing of aortic valve surgery earlier than the current guidelines. Larger prospective RCTs are required to evaluate the benefit of earlier surgical intervention.

Long-Term Outcomes in Patients With Mixed Aortic Valve Disease and Preserved Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Background

Concurrent presence of aortic stenosis and aortic regurgitation is termed mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD). Although multiple articles have addressed patients with “isolated” aortic stenosis or aortic regurgitation, the natural history, impact, and outcomes of MAVD are not well defined. Here, we evaluate long‐term outcomes in patients with MAVD and cardiovascular adaptations to chronic MAVD.

Methods and Results

This observational cohort study evaluated 862 adult patients (56.8% male) with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction and at least moderate aortic regurgitation and moderate aortic stenosis. Primary outcome was all‐cause mortality. Subgroup analysis was based on treatment modality (aortic valve replacement [AVR] versus medical management). A regression analysis of longitudinal echocardiographic parameters was performed to assess the natural history of MAVD. Mean age was 68±15 years, and mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 58±5%. At 4.6 years (25th–75th percentile range, 1.0–8.7), 58.6% of patients underwent an AVR and 48.8% patients died. In both unadjusted and adjusted Cox survival analysis, AVR was associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.34–0.51, P<0.001). Impact of AVR persisted when stratifying the cohort by symptom status and baseline aortic valve area (log rank, P<0.001 for both) and after propensity‐score matching (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.32–0.50; P<0.001). In the longitudinal analysis, there were statistically significant changes over time in aortic valve peak gradient (P<0.001) and aortic valve area (P<0.001) and only mild increases in left ventricular end‐diastolic (P<0.007) and ‐systolic (P<0.001) volumes.

Conclusions

MAVD confers a high risk of all‐cause mortality. However, AVR significantly reduces this risk independent of aortic valve area, symptom status, and after controlling for confounding variables.