With the aging of the population, the incidence of degenerative cardiovascular diseases has
steadily increased, especially aortic stenosis (AS), present in 3%-5% of the population
older than 75 years[1,2]. In the last decade, severe AS is characterized taking into
account several functional aspects between the left ventricle and the aorta, especially by
echocardiography, such as mean transvalvular gradient > 40 mmHg, transvalvular jet
velocity > 4 m/s and aortic valve area < 1 cm2, as well as anatomical
aspects such as the degree of the aortic valve calcification. Studies carried out in the
70s [3-5] describing the hemodynamic parameters and ventricular function
characterized the diagnosis of severe AS only by aortic valve gradient peak > 50 mmHg by
hemodynamic analysis and > 70 mmHg by echocardiography. At that time, they questioned
the real benefit of surgery in the correction of severe AS and left ventricular dysfunction
due to the fact that these exams showed difficulties identifying patients that could
benefit from such treatment. In the 80s and 90s, still with limitations in ventricular
function assessment, the intervention indication was only feasible in patients with severe
AS (aortic transvalvular gradient peak > 70 mmHg by echocardiography), regardless of the
degree of left ventricular dysfunction[6,7].It is noteworthy that in the last two decades, with the incessant search for answers to
these questions and the advent of pharmacological stress echocardiography, emphasis has
been given to these peculiar forms of AS, particularly to severe AS with low-flow
low-gradient and reduced ejection fraction, with or without contractile reserve. The latter
has been the subject of great scientific interest due to the difficulty in diagnosing it
and evaluating the real benefits of surgical intervention.The low-flow low-gradient AS and reduced ejection fraction is found in approximately 5%-10%
of these patients with severe AS, and diagnosis occurs in the presence of classic symptoms
of AS, such as dyspnea, chest pain and/or syncope, associated with aortic valve area ≤ 1.0
cm2 (or ≤ 0.6 cm2/m2), mean LV-Ao gradient ≤ 40 mmHg
and reduced ejection fraction (≤ 40%)[8-10]. The ventricular dysfunction, in these
cases, may be secondary to ventricular maladjustment caused by afterload mismatch - truly
severe m2AS - or secondary to a myocardial phenomenon concomitant to the
mild/moderate valvular disease - anatomically non-severe AS. In the latter, the reduction
in ventricular strength would lead to incomplete valve opening, justifying the low
transvalvular aortic gradient[10,11]. The differentiation between these two
groups is of utmost importance, as patients with anatomically severe m2AS
benefit from the valvular defect correction, whereas treatment for those with anatomically
non-severe AS should be directed to the cause of the myocardial disease[10,11].
Therefore, the first question that arises for the clinical cardiologist is: how must one
monitor and investigate the patient with a diagnostic hypothesis of low-flow low-gradient
AS and reduced ejection fraction?The initial assessment should be performed by dobutamine stress echocardiography (up to a
dose of 20 mcg/kg/min), analyzing myocardial contractile reserve which, when present,
allows us to define the anatomical severity of AS[10-12]. If the valve area
increase after stress is ≤ 0.3 cm2 and/or remains < 1.0 cm2 and/or
mean LV-Ao gradient is ≥ 40 mm Hg, the anatomically severe AS diagnosis is attained. On the
other hand, further increases in the valvular area establish the diagnosis of anatomically
non-severe AS. Among the measures described to define contractile reserve during dobutamine
stress, Systolic Volume is the most often used index[11]. The absence of contractile reserve is defined by an increase in
Systolic Volume after pharmacological stress < 20%[10,11], and this situation
creates a new question for the clinical cardiologist: Is there any benefit in the
interventional treatment of those who do not have myocardial contractile reserve?These patients have high surgical mortality (22%-33%); however, this rate is still lower
than the mortality observed in patients with AS that remain in clinical treatment[10,11,13]. Therefore, alternative procedures such as
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) m2can be indicated with lower
morbimortality[13,14]. However, as stress echocardiography may have major
limitations in identifying patients with truly severe AS in the absence of contractile
reserve, how should we evaluate and what methods can help by providing information about
the anatomical severity and prognosis, aiding in the indication of valve surgery for the
symptomatic patient?Valve calcification is the primary marker of anatomic severity in AS. The echocardiographic
assessment using the Rosenhek score[15]
defines as significant calcification those with grade 3 (multiple calcium deposits) and
grade 4 (extensive calcification of all cusps)[16]. In the assessment through CT, a calcium score > 1650 Agatston
units (AU) also indicates severe calcification[16]. However, ongoing studies suggest that the hemodynamic impact of AS
may depend not only on the amount of calcium in the aortic valve, but also the topography
of valve calcifications, demonstrating that significantly lower calcium score values can
generate high gradients if the calcification is predominantly found in the valve
commissure, with such data helping in the diagnosis of anatomically severe AS[17]. It must be emphasized that, although
infrequent, aortic valve calcification may extend to the mitral valve annulus, impairing
its function and resulting in moderate to severe mitral regurgitation, which can hinder the
assessment of AS severity by reducing left intraventricular pressure. Additionally, in our
experience, when severe AS is identified, the isolated treatment of the aortic valve can
minimize the effect on the mitral apparatus.Regarding the operative prognosis, the presence of a mean LV-Ao gradient ≤ 20 mmHg on
echocardiography and high levels of serum brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) are associated
with unfavorable outcomes. Patients with low-flow low-gradient AS and reduced ejection
fraction with BNP levels < 550 pg/mL, regardless of contractile reserve, have a better
surgical prognosis[13,18,19]. The presence of
coronary lesions with intervention indication in the coronary angiography, usually
performed as part of preoperative tests in patients older than 40 years or with risk
factors for atherosclerosis, is also a prognostic factor, as the combined surgery of CABG
and TAVI increases mortality when compared to isolated valve replacement (53% vs. 10%, p =
0.007)[13]. Nishimura et al[20] demonstrated the use of hemodynamic study
with dobutamine stress for contractile reserve assessment similar to echocardiography;
however, they used high doses of dobutamine (40 mcg/kg/min), which may increase the
likelihood of complications and side effects during testing, such as severe arrhythmia,
hypertension or hypotension and other symptoms of dobutamine intolerance.In conclusion, dobutamine stress echocardiogram is a crucial test for the assessment of
patients with low-flow, low-gradient AS and reduced ejection fraction, by differentiating
anatomically severe AS patients from those with anatomically non-severe AS. However, when
the test is not diagnostic, that is, the patient has no contractile reserve, other
parameters can be useful to assess anatomic severity and prognosis (Figure 1). There are many variables that can contribute to such
evaluation in patients with low-flow, low-gradient AS and reduced ejection fraction without
contractile reserve; however, none of them alone should contraindicate the surgical
procedure. One must, above all, individualize the assessment of this subgroup of patients
and, for those in which the operative risk is considered unacceptable, TAVI is
mandatory.
Figure 1
Proposed Algorithm for assessment of patients with low-flow, low-gradient Aortic
Stenosis and reduced ejection fraction. AS: aortic stenosis; AoA: aortic valve area;
Grad: LV-Ao gradient.
Proposed Algorithm for assessment of patients with low-flow, low-gradient Aortic
Stenosis and reduced ejection fraction. AS: aortic stenosis; AoA: aortic valve area;
Grad: LV-Ao gradient.
Authors: P M Pomerantzeff; F Tarasoutchi; F S de Brito Júnior; A M Munhoz; L F Cardoso; C M Brandão; M Grinberg; N A Stolf; G Bellotti; F Pileggi; A D Jatene Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 1996-12 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: F Tarasoutchi; M Grinberg; L S Ferlante; L F Cardoso; P de L Lavítola; M Rati; P Pomerantzeff; G Bellotti; A Jatene; F Pileggi Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 1987-05 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: C R deFilippi; D L Willett; M E Brickner; C P Appleton; C W Yancy; E J Eichhorn; P A Grayburn Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1995-01-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Marie-Annick Clavel; Christina Fuchs; Ian G Burwash; Gerald Mundigler; Jean G Dumesnil; Helmut Baumgartner; Jutta Bergler-Klein; Rob S Beanlands; Patrick Mathieu; Julien Magne; Philippe Pibarot Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Łukasz Kuźma; Jolanta Małyszko; Hanna Bachórzewska-Gajewska; Marta Maria Niwińska; Anna Kurasz; Małgorzata Zalewska-Adamiec; Marcin Kożuch; Sławomir Dobrzycki Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2020-07-14 Impact factor: 2.370