Aortic valve stenosis: To the gradient and beyond - The mismatch between area and gradient severity

Journal of Interventional Cardiology

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 183-194

  Abbas, Amr E ^a   Franey, Laura M ^a   Goldstein, James ^a   Lester, Steven ^b  

^a WILLIAM BEAUMONT HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DOBUTAMINE;

AORTA VALVE; AORTA VALVE STENOSIS; ARTICLE; BLOOD FLOW; BLOOD VESSEL DIAMETER; CARDIOVASCULAR MORTALITY; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; FLOW RATE; HEART EJECTION FRACTION; HEART FUNCTION; HEART HEMODYNAMICS; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; MEASUREMENT ERROR; PRESSURE GRADIENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; SURGICAL RISK; SYSTEMIC VASCULAR RESISTANCE;

AORTIC VALVE; AORTIC VALVE STENOSIS; BLOOD FLOW VELOCITY; CARDIAC CATHETERIZATION; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, DOPPLER; HUMANS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

EID: 84876020544     PISSN: 08964327     EISSN: 15408183     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/joic.12004     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Kanu C, et al. ACC/AHA 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease. Circulation 2006; 114: e84-e231.
2. Vahanian A, Alfieri O, Andreotti F, et al. Guidelines for the Management of Valvular heart Disease. Eurheartj 2012; 33, 2451-2496.
3. Dumesnil JG, Pibarot P, Carabello B,. Paradoxical Low Flow and/or Low Gradient Severe Aortic Stenosis Despite Preserved Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction: Implications for Diagnosis and Treatment. Eurheartj 2010; 31: 281-289.
4. Burwash IG,. Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis: From Evaluation to Treatment. Current Opinion in Cardiology 2007; 22: 84-91.
5. Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG, Clavel MA,. Paradoxical Low Flow, Low Gradient Aortic Stenosis Despite Preserved Ejection Fraction. ACVD 2008; 101: 595-596.
6. Bermejo J, Yotti R,. Low-Gradient Aortic Valve Stenosis: Value and Limitations of Dobutamine Stress Testing. Heart 2007; 93: 298-302.
7. Bach D,. Echo/Doppler Evaluation of Hemodynamics After Aortic Valve Replacement: Principles of Interrogation and Evaluation of High Gradients. J Am Coll Cardiol Img 2010; 3: 296-304.
8. Chambers JB, Sprigings DC, Cochrane T, et al. Continuity Equation and Grolin Formula Compared with Directly Observed Orifice Area in Native and Prosthetic Aortic valves. Br Heart J 1992; 67: 193-199.
9. Oh JK, Taliercio CP, Holmes DR Jr., et al. Prediction of the severity of aortic stenosis by Doppler aortic valve area determination: prospective Doppler-catheterization correlation in 100 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 1988; 11: 1227-1234.
10. Levine RA, Schwammenthal E,. Stenosis is in the Eye of the Observer: Impact of Pressure Recovery on Assessing Aortic Valve Area. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 41 (3): 443-445.
11. Schöbel WA, Voelker W, Haase KK, et al. Extent, determinants and clinical importance of pressure recovery in patients with aortic valve stenosis. Eur Heart J 1999; 20 (18): 1355-1363.
12. Garcia D, Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG, et al. Assessment of Aortic Valve Stenosis Severity: A New Index Based on the Energy Loss Concept. Circulation 2000; 101: 765-771.
13. Bahlmann E, Cramariuc D, Gerdts E, et al. Impact of Pressure Recovery on Echocardiographic Assessment of Asymptomatic Aortic Stenosis. Eur J Echocardiogr 2011; 12 (8): 585-590.
14. Lancellotti P, Magne J, Donal E, et al. Clinical Outcome In Asymptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis, Insights From the New Proposed Aortic Stenosis Grading Classification. J Am Coll Cardiol Img 2012; 3: 235-243.
15. Baumgartner H, Hung J, Bermejo J, et al. Echocardiographic assessment of valve stenosis: EAE/ASE recommendations for clinical practice. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2009; 22 (1): 1-23.
16. Minners J, Allgeier M, Gohlke-Baerwolf C, et al. Inconsistent grading of aortic valve stenosis by current guidelines: haemodynamic studies in patients with apparently normal left ventricular function. Heart 2010; 96: 1463-1468.
17. Mascherbauer J, Schima H, Rosenhek R, et al. Value and Limitations of Aortic Valve Resistance With Particular Consideration of Low Flow-Low Gradient Aortic Stenosis: An In Vitro Study. European Heart Journal 2004; 25: 787-793.
18. Hachicha Z, Dumesnil JG, Bogarty P, et al. Paradoxical Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Severe Aortic Stenosis Despite Preserved Ejection Fraction is Associated With Higher Afterload and Reduced Survival. Circulation 2007; 115: 2856-2864.
19. Cramariuc D, Cioffi G, Rieck AE, et al. Low-Flow Aortic Stenosis in Asymptomatic Patients: Valvular Arterial Impedance and Systolic Function from the SEAS substudy. J Am Coll Cardiol Img 2009; 2: 390-399.
20. Briand M, Dumesnil JG, Kadem L, et al. Reduced Systemic Arterial Compliance Impacts Significantly on Left Ventricular Afterload and Function in Aortic Stenosis: Implications for Diagnosis and Treatment. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46: 291-298.
21. Barasch E, Fan D, Chukwu EO, et al. Severe Isolated Aortic Stenosis with Normal Left Ventricular Systolic Function and Low Transvalvular Gradients: Pathophysiologic and Prognostic Insights. J Heart Valve Dis 2008; 17: 81-88.
22. Jander N, Minners J, Holme I, et al. Outcome of patients with low-gradient "severe" aortic stenosis and preserved ejection Circulation 2011; 123 (8): 887-895.
23. Clavel MA, Fuchs C, Burwash IG, et al. Predictors of Outcomes in Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis: Results of the Multicenter TOPAS Study. Circulation 2008; 118: S234-S242.
24. deFilippi CR, Willett DL, Brickner ME, et al. Usefulness of Dobutamine Echocardiography in Distinguishing Severe from Nonsevere Valvular Aortic Stenosis in Patients with Depressed Left Ventricular Function and Low Transvalvular Gradients. Am J Cardiol 1995; 75: 191-194.
25. Nishimura RA, Grantham A, Connolly HM, et al. Low-Output, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis in Patients With Depressed Left Ventricular Systolic Function: The Clinical Utility of the Dobutamine Challenge in the Catheterization Laboratory. Circulation 2002; 106: 809-813.
26. Blais C, Burwash IG, Mundigler G, et al. Projected Valve Area at Normal Flow Rate Improves the Assessment of Stenosis Severity in Patients with Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis. Circulation 2006; 113: 711-721.
27. Van Auker MD, Chandra M, Shirani J, et al. Jet Eccentricity: A Misleading Source of Agreement Between Doppler/Catheter Pressure Gradients in Aortic Stenosis. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2005; 18 (12): 1392-1398.
28. Donal E, Novaro GM, Deserrano D, et al. Planimetric assessment of anatomic valve area overestimates effective orifice area in bicuspid aortic stenosis. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2005; 18 (12): 1392-1398.
29. Richards KE, Deserranno D, Donal E, et al. Influence of structural geometry on the severity of bicuspid aortic stenosis. Am J Physiol 2004; 287 (3): H1410-H1416.
30. Pibarot P, Dumesnil J,. Improving Assessment of Aortic Stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 60: 169-180.
31. Zekry SB, Saad RM, Ozkan M, et al. Flow Acceleration Time and Ratio of Acceleration Time to Ejection Time for Prosthetic Aortic Valve Function. J Am Coll Cardiol Img 2011; 4: 1161-1170.
32. Zoghbi WA, Chambers JB, Dumesnil JG, et al. Recommendations for Evaluation of Prosthetic Valves With Echocardiography and Doppler Ultrasound. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2007; 975-1014.
33. Daneshvar SA, Rahimtoola SH,. Valve Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch. A long Term Perspective. J Am Coll Cardiol Img 2012; 60: 1123-1135.