OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcome assessment of percutaneous balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) in different flow and gradient patterns of severe aortic stenosis (AS). BACKGROUND: The mean pressure gradient reduction after BAV is an often-used surrogate parameter to evaluate procedural success. The definition of a successful BAV has not been evaluated in different subgroups of severe AS, which were introduced in the latest guidelines on the management of patients with valvular heart disease. METHODS: In this observational study, consecutive patients from July 2009 to March 2018 undergoing BAV were divided into normal-flow high-gradient (NFHG), low-flow low-gradient (LFLG), and paradoxical low-flow low-gradient (pLFLG) AS. Baseline characteristics, hemodynamic, and clinical information were collected and compared. RESULTS: One-hundred-fifty-six patients were grouped into NFHG (n = 68, 43.5%), LFLG (n = 68, 43.5%), and pLFLG (n = 20, 12.8%) AS. Mean age of the study population was 81 years. Cardiogenic shock or refractory heart failure (46.8%) was the most common underlying reasons for BAV. Spearman correlation revealed that the mean pressure gradient reduction, determined by echocardiography, had a moderate correlation with the increase in the aortic valve area (AVA) in patients with NFHG AS (ρ: 0.529, p < .001) but showed no association in patients with LFLG (ρ: 0.017, p = .289) and pLFLG (ρ: 0.030, p = .889) AS. BAV as bridge to surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement was possible in 44.2% of patients, with no difference between groups (p = .070). CONCLUSION: The mean pressure gradient reduction might be an adequate surrogate parameter for BAV success in patients with NFHG AS but is not suitable for patients with other hemodynamic entities.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcome assessment of percutaneous balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) in different flow and gradient patterns of severe aortic stenosis (AS). BACKGROUND: The mean pressure gradient reduction after BAV is an often-used surrogate parameter to evaluate procedural success. The definition of a successful BAV has not been evaluated in different subgroups of severe AS, which were introduced in the latest guidelines on the management of patients with valvular heart disease. METHODS: In this observational study, consecutive patients from July 2009 to March 2018 undergoing BAV were divided into normal-flow high-gradient (NFHG), low-flow low-gradient (LFLG), and paradoxical low-flow low-gradient (pLFLG) AS. Baseline characteristics, hemodynamic, and clinical information were collected and compared. RESULTS: One-hundred-fifty-six patients were grouped into NFHG (n = 68, 43.5%), LFLG (n = 68, 43.5%), and pLFLG (n = 20, 12.8%) AS. Mean age of the study population was 81 years. Cardiogenic shock or refractory heart failure (46.8%) was the most common underlying reasons for BAV. Spearman correlation revealed that the mean pressure gradient reduction, determined by echocardiography, had a moderate correlation with the increase in the aortic valve area (AVA) in patients with NFHG AS (ρ: 0.529, p < .001) but showed no association in patients with LFLG (ρ: 0.017, p = .289) and pLFLG (ρ: 0.030, p = .889) AS. BAV as bridge to surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement was possible in 44.2% of patients, with no difference between groups (p = .070). CONCLUSION: The mean pressure gradient reduction might be an adequate surrogate parameter for BAV success in patients with NFHG AS but is not suitable for patients with other hemodynamic entities.