Paradoxical Low Flow Aortic Valve Stenosis: Incidence, Evaluation and clinical significance topical collection on valvular heart disease

Current Cardiology Reports

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2014, Pages

  Clavel, Marie Annick ^a   Pibarot, Philippe ^a   Dumesnil, Jean G ^a  

^a LAVAL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Aortic stenosis; Doppler echocardiography; Paradoxical low flow aortic valve stenosis

Indexed keywords

AGED; AORTA VALVE REPLACEMENT; AORTA VALVE STENOSIS; ARTICLE; CASE REPORT; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CLINICAL FEATURE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY BLOOD FLOW; CORONARY ARTERY CALCIUM SCORE; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE EJECTION FRACTION; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE FILLING; HEART STROKE VOLUME; HEART VENTRICLE PRESSURE; HEART VENTRICLE REMODELING; HEART WORK; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; PARADOXICAL LOW FLOW AORTA VALVE STENOSIS; PREVALENCE; STRESS ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; DOPPLER ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; HEART VALVE REPLACEMENT; METHODOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; REVIEW;

AGED; AORTIC VALVE STENOSIS; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, DOPPLER; FEMALE; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; STROKE VOLUME; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84893148730     PISSN: 15233782     EISSN: 15343170     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11886-013-0431-x     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Kanu C, et al. ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (writing committee to revise the 1998 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease): developed in collaboration with the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists: endorsed by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation. 2006;114:e84-e231.
2. Hachicha Z, Dumesnil JG, Bogaty P, Pibarot P. Paradoxical low flow, low gradient severe aortic stenosis despite preserved ejection fraction is associated with higher afterload and reduced survival. Circulation. 2007;115:2856-64.
3. 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;17:81-8.
4. •• 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. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:281-9. This paper proposes a 4-group classification based on gradient (low vs. high) and flow (low vs. high).
5. Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG. Low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis with normal and depressed left ventricular ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1845-53.
6. Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG. Paradoxical low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis: Adding new pieces to the puzzle. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:413-5.
7. 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;2:390-9.
8. Lancellotti P, Donal E, Magne J, et al. Impact of global left ventricular afterload on left ventricular function in asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis: a two-dimensional speckle-tracking study. Eur J Echocardiogr. 2010;11:537-43.
9. Adda J, Mielot C, Giorgi R, et al. Low-flow, low-gradient severe aortic stenosis despite normal ejection fraction is associated with severe left ventricular dysfunction as assessed by speckle tracking echocardiography: A multicenter study. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5:27-35.
10. • Clavel MA, Dumesnil JG, Capoulade R, et al. Outcome of patients with aortic stenosis, small valve area and low-flow, low-gradient despite preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1259-67. This paper shows that survival is worse in patients with paradoxical low-flow, low-gradient compared with those with high-gradient severe AS and those with moderate AS but comparable gradients.
11. •• 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. 2012;59:235-43. This paper provides a validation of the classification proposed in reference 4 and demonstrates that patients with paradoxical low-flow, low-gradient have worse outcomes compared to those with normal-flow, low-gradient.
12. Dumesnil JG, Shoucri RM. Effect of the geometry of the left ventricle on the calculation of ejection fraction. Circulation. 1982;65:91-8.
13. Dumesnil JG, Shoucri RM, Laurenceau JL, Turcot J. A mathematical model of the dynamic geometry of the intact left ventricle and its application to clinical data. Circulation. 1979;59:1024-34.
14. Herrmann S, Stork S, Niemann M, et al. Low-gradient aortic valve stenosis: Myocardial fibrosis and its influence on function and outcome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:402-12.
15. Lee SP, Kim YJ, Kim JH, et al. Deterioration of myocardial function in paradoxical low-flow severe aortic stenosis: Two-dimensional strain analysis. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2011;24:976-83.
16. Melis G, Frontera G, Caldentey G, et al. Systolic volume index by Doppler echocardiography is an useful marker for stratification and prognostic evaluation in patients with severe aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2013;66:261-8.
17. 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;96:1463-8.
18. Mehrotra P, Jansen K, Flynn AW, et al.: Differential left ventricular remodelling and longitudinal function distinguishes low flow from normal-flow preserved ejection fraction low-gradient severe aortic stenosis. Eur Heart J. 2013.
19. •• Herrmann HC, Pibarot P, Hueter I, et al. Predictors of mortality and outcomes of therapy in low flow severe aortic stenosis: A PARTNER trial analysis. Circulation. 2013;127:2316-26. This posthoc analysis of the PARTNER trial demonstrates that patients with low flow have worse outcomes compared to patients with normal flow and that survival of patients with paradoxical low-flow, low-gradient is improved with TAVR compared to medical therapy.
20. 2 is a powerful independent predictor of survival following TAVR, irrespective of gradient or LVEF.
21. Jander N, Minners J, Holme I, et al. Outcome of patients with low-gradient severe aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction. Circulation. 2011;123:887-95.
22. Bahlmann E, Gerdts E, Cramariuc D, et al. Prognostic value of energy loss index in asymptomatic aortic stenosis. Circulation. 2013;127:1149-56.
23. Nishimura RA, Grantham JA, 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;106:809-13.
24. •• Clavel MA, Ennezat PV, Maréchaux S, et al. Stress echocardiography to assess stenosis severity and predict outcome in patients with paradoxical low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis and preserved LVEF. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2013;6:175-83. This is the first study to demonstrate the usefulness of stress echocardiography to differentiate true from pseudo-severe AS in patients with paradoxical low-flow, low-gradient AS.
25. 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: The multicenter TOPAS (Truly or Pseudo Severe Aortic Stenosis) study. Circulation. 2006;113:711-21.
26. Clavel MA, Burwash IG, Mundigler G, et al. Validation of conventional and simplified methods to calculate projected valve area at normal flow rate in patients with low flow, low gradient aortic stenosis: the multicenter TOPAS (True or Pseudo Severe Aortic Stenosis) study. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2010;23:380-6.
27. 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:S234-42.
28. Fougères É, Tribouilloy C, Monchi M, et al. Outcomes of pseudo-severe aortic stenosis under conservative treatment. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:2426-33.
29. • Eleid MF, Nishimura RA, Sorajja P, Borlaug BA. Systemic Hypertension in Low Gradient Severe Aortic Stenosis with Preserved Ejection Fraction. Circulation. 2013. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.003071. This study further underlines the contribution of hypertension in the pathophysiology of paradoxical low-flow, low-gradient AS and the findings of this study suggest that nitroprusside vasodilation in the cathetertization laboratory may be useful to corroborate the stenosis severity in these patients.
30. Nishimura RA, Carabello BA. Hemodynamics in the cardiac catheterization laboratory of the 21st century. Circulation. 2012;125:2138-50.
31. Cueff C, Serfaty JM, Cimadevilla C, et al. Measurement of aortic valve calcification using multislice computed tomography: correlation with haemodynamic severity of aortic stenosis and clinical implication for patients with low ejection fraction. Heart. 2011;97:721-6.
32. Aggarwal SR, Clavel MA, Messika-Zeitoun D, et al. Sex differences in aortic valve calcification measured by multidetector computed tomography in aortic stenosis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;6:40-7.
33. •• Clavel MA, Messika-Zeitoun D, Pibarot P, et al. The complex nature of Discordant Severe Calcified Aortic Valve Disease Grading: New Insights from combined Doppler-Echocardiographic and Computed Tomographic Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.08.1621. This is the first study to demonstrate that we need different thresholds of aortic valve calcification in women vs. men to identify severe aortic stenosis.
34. Vahanian A, Alfieri O, Andreotti F, et al. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012). Joint task force on the management of valvular heart disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC); European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J. 2012;33:2451-96.
35. • Ozkan A, Hachamovitch R, Kapadia SR, et al. Impact of aortic valve replacement on outcome of symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis with low gradient and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. Circulation. 2013. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.001094. This study shows that AVR is associated with major survival benefit compared to medical therapy in patients with paradoxical low-flow, low-gradient as well as in those with normal-flow, low-gradient and small aortic valve area.