Prognostic value of secondary cardiac alterations in patients with moderate aortic valve stenosis

Abstract Purpose Echocardiographic characteristics that predict the progression of moderate aortic valve stenosis (mAS) are lacking. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the prognostic value of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), diastolic dysfunction (DD) and pulmonary artery hypertension (...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European heart journal 2021-10, Vol.42 (Supplement_1)
Hauptverfasser: Stoebe, S, Kandels, J, Metze, M, Lenk, K, Kuehne, C, Lavall, D, Laufs, U, Hagendorff, A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Purpose Echocardiographic characteristics that predict the progression of moderate aortic valve stenosis (mAS) are lacking. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the prognostic value of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), diastolic dysfunction (DD) and pulmonary artery hypertension (PAH) in patients with mAS. Methods A total of 137 patients with asymptomatic mAS (age 72±10 years; females: 51 (37%); Blood Pressure: 143±21 / 78±13 mmHg) were included. Echocardiography was performed at baseline and at follow-up every six or/and twelve months. Patients with concomitant valvular defects, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were excluded. mAS was defined by current guideline criteria. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), LVH (LV mass index, males: >115g/m2, females: >95 g/m2), DD (E/e' >14) and PAH (maximum regurgitant velocity of tricuspid valve (TRVmax) >2.8m/s) were assessed. mAS patients were divided into 4 subgroups based on the number of secondary cardiac alterations: (0) no; (1) one; (2) two; (3) three cardiac alterations. The primary endpoint was progression to severe AS with indication for treatment (effective aortic orifice area (EOA) by continuity equation 0.05; (2): 1.29±0.20 vs. 1.01±0.20, p0.05; (2): 22.7±9.32 vs. 30.5±12.61, p
ISSN:0195-668X
1522-9645
DOI:10.1093/eurheartj/ehab724.1565