Comparison of the hemodynamic parameters of transaortic blood flow in patients with aortic stenosis depending on the bicuspid or tricuspid valve structure

Purpose: comparison of hemodynamic parameters of transaortic blood flow in patients with aortic stenosis depending on the bivalve or tricuspid structure of the aortic valve.

Materials and methods. A study of 180 patients with isolated aortic valve stenosis (AC) with two – and threeleaf structure was conducted. Patients were ranked into 3 comparison subgroups by the area of the effective AC opening from 4 to 1.5 cm2; 1.5 to 1 cm2 and less than 1 cm2. An echocardiographic study was performed with the calculation of all the necessary parameters for the study.

Results. The comparison subgroups were comparable in terms of effective orifice area (AVA), effective orifice area index (IAVA), body mass index (BMI), LV UO index, and LV FV (p > 0.05). However, the indicators Vmax, Gmean, and AT in patients with a bivalve AK structure in all comparison subgroups were significantly higher than in patients with a tricuspid structure. Comparison subgroup with AVA from 4 to 1.5 cm2: Vmax 2.8 ± 9 m/s and 2.5 ± 6 m/s p = 0.02. Gmean 18.6 ± 7.2 mm Hg and 15 ± 6 mm Hg p = 0.03, AT 82 ± 12 ms and 70 ± 10 ms p = 0.002. Comparison subgroup with AVA from 1.5 to 1 cm2: Vmax 3.7 ± 0.8 m/s and 3.5 ± 0.6 m/s p = 0.02. Average transaortic gradient 37 ± 10 mm Hg and 29 ± 5 mm Hg p = 0.04, AT 103 ± 11 ms and 94 ± 10 ms p = 0.02. Comparison subgroup with an effective area of less than 1 cm2: Vmax 5.7 ± 1.2 m/s and 4.7 ± 0.7 m/s p = 0.001, Gmean 54 ± 15 and 43 ± 11 mm Hg p < 0.001, AT 127 ± 20 ms and 112 ± 10 ms p = 0.002.

Conclusion. Echocardiographic indicators of Vmax and Gmean in patients with bivalve AC structure have higher values than in patients with tricuspid AC structure with a comparable opening area.

1. Baumgartner H., Hung J., Bermejo J., Chambers J.B., Edvardsen T., Goldstein S., Lancellotti P., LeFevre M., Miller F. Jr., Otto C.M., Recommendations on the echocardiographic assessment of aortic valve stenosis: a focused update from the european association of cardiovascular imaging and the american society of echocardiography J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2017; 30 (4): 372–392.

2. Lancellotti P., Donal E., Magne J., Moonen M., O'Connor K., Daubert J.C. Risk stratification in asymptomatic moderate to severe aortic stenosis: the importance of the valvular, arterial and ventricular interplay. Heart. 2010; 96: 1364–1371.

3. Vahanian A., Alfieri O., Andreotti F., Antunes M.J., Bar n- Esquivias G., Baumgartner H., Borger M.A., Carrel T.P., De Bonis M., Evangelista A., Falk V., Iung B., Lancellotti P., Pierard L., Price S., Schäfers H.J., Schuler G., Stepinska J., Swedberg K., Takkenberg J., Von Oppell U.O., Windecker S., Zamorano J.L., Zembala M. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012). Eur. Heart J. 2012; 33 (19): 2451–2496. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehs109

4. Nishimura R.A., Otto C.M., Bonow R.O., Carabello B.A., Erwin J.P. 3rd, Guyton R.A., O'Gara P.T., Ruiz C.E., Skubas N.J., Sorajja P., Sundt T.M. 3rd, Thomas J.D. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline 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. ACC/AHA Task Force Members. Circulation. 2014; 10: 2438–2488.

5. Baumgartner H., Hung J., Bermejo J., Chambers J.B., Edvardsen T, Goldstein S., Lancellotti P., LeFevre M., Miller F. Jr, Otto C.M. Recommendations on the echocardio graphic assessment of aortic valve stenosis: a focused update from the european association of cardiovascular imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography journal of the American Society of Echocardiography. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2017; 30: 372–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2017.02.009.

6. Minners J., Allgeier M., Gohlke-Baerwolf C., Kienzle R.P., Neumann F.J., Jander N. Inconsistent grading of aortic valve stenosis by current guidelines: haemodynamic studies in patients with apparently normal left ventricular function. Heart. 2010; 96: 1463–1468. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2009.181982

7. Minners J., Allgeier M., Gohlke-Baerwolf C., Kienzle R.P., Neumann F.J., Jander N. Inconsistencies of echo cardiographic criteria for the grading of aortic valve stenosis. Eur. Heart J. 2008; 29: 1043–1048.

8. Jander N., Minners J., Holme I., Gerdts E., Boman K., Brudi P., Chambers J.B., Egstrup K., Kesäniemi Y.A, Malbecq W., Nienaber C.A., Ray S, Rossebø A., Pedersen T.R., Skjærpe T., Willenheimer R., Wachtell K., Neumann F.J., Gohlke-Bärwolf C. Outcome of patients with low-gradient “severe” aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction. Circulation. 2011; 123: 887–895.

9. Michelena H.I., Margaryan E., Miller F.A., Eleid M., Maalouf J., Suri R., Messika-Zeitoun D., Pellikka P.A., Enriquez-Sarano M. Inconsistent echocardiographic grading of aortic stenosis: is the left ventricular outflow tract important? Heart. 2013; 99: 921–931.

10. Hachicha Z., Dumesnil J.G., 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: 2856–2864.

11. Ozkan A. Low gradient “severe” aortic stenosis with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. Cardiovasc. Diagn. Ther. 2012; 2: 19–27.

12. Pibarot P., Dumesnil J.G. Low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis with normal and depressed left ventricular ejection fraction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2012; 60: 1845–1853.

13. Adda J., Mielot C., Giorgi R., Cransac F., Zirphile X., Donal E., Sportouch-Dukhan C., Réant P., Laffitte S., Cade S., Le Dolley Y., Thuny F., Touboul N., Lavoute C., Avierinos J.F., Lancellotti P., Habib G. Low-flow, lowgradient 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.

14. Eleid M.F., Sorajja P., Michelena H.I., Malouf J.F., Scott C.G., Pellikka P.A. Flow-gradient patterns in severe aortic stenosis with preserved ejection fraction: clinical characteristics and predictors of survival. Circulation. 2013; 128: 1781–1789.

15. Lancellotti P., Magne J., Donal E., Davin L., O'Connor K., Rosca M., Szymanski C., Cosyns B., Piérard L.A. Clinical outcome in asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis insights from the new proposed aortic stenosis grading classification. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2012; 59: 235–243.

16. Saito T., Muro T., Takeda H., Hyodo E., Ehara S., Nakamura Y., Hanatani A., Shimada K., Yoshiyama M. Prognostic value of aortic valve area index in asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis. Am. J. Cardiol. 2012; 110: 93–97.

17. Jander N., Gohlke-Bärwolf C., Bahlmann E., Gerdts E., Boman K., Chambers J.B., Egstrup K., Nienaber C.A., Pedersen T.R., Ray S., Rossebø A.B., Willenheimer R., Kienzle R.P., Wachtell K., Neumann F.J., Minners J. Indexing aortic valve area by body surface area increases the prevalence of severe aortic stenosis. Heart. 2014; 100: 28–33.

18. Jander N., Gohlke-Bärwolf C., Bahlmann E., Gerdts E., Boman K., Chambers J.B., Egstrup K., Nienaber C.A., Pedersen T.R., Ray S., Rossebø A.B., Willenheimer R., Kienzle R.P., Wachtell K., Neumann F.J., Minners J. Adjusting parameters of aortic valve stenosis severity by body size. Heart. 2014; 100: 1024–1030.

19. Zoghbi W.A., Enriquez-Sarano M., Foster E., Grayburn P.A., Kraft C.D., Levine R.A., Nihoyannopoulos P., Otto C.M., Quinones M.A., Rakowski H., Stewart W.J., Waggoner A., Weissman N.J. Recommendations for evaluation of the severity of native valvular regurgitation with twodimensional and Doppler echocardiography. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2003; 16: 777–802.

20. Baumgartner H., Stefenelli T., Niederberger J., Schima H., Maurer G. ‘Overestimation’of catheter gradients by Doppler ultrasound in patients with aortic stenosis: a predictable manifestation of pressure recovery. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 1999; 33: 1655–1661.

21. Mascherbauer J., Fuchs C., Stoiber M., Schima H., Pernicka E., Maurer G. Systemic pressure does not directly affect pressure gradient and valve area estimates in aortic stenosis in vitro. Eur. Heart J. 2008; 29: 2049–2057.