Quantification of Significant Aortic Stenosis by Echocardiography versus Four-Dimensional Cardiac Computed Tomography: A Multi-Modality Imaging Study.

Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) grading of aortic stenosis (AS) is challenging when parameters are discrepant, and four-dimensional cardiac computed tomography (4D-CCT) is increasingly utilized for transcatheter intervention workup. We compared TTE and 4D-CCT measures contributing to AS quantification. AS patients (n = 80, age 86 ± 10 years, 71% men) referred for transcatheter replacement in 2014−2017 were retrospectively studied, 20 each with high-gradient AS (HG-AS), classical and paradoxical low-flow low-gradient AS (CLFLG-AS and PLFLG-AS), and normal-flow low-gradient AS (NFLG-AS). Correlation and Bland−Altman analyses were performed between TTE and 4D-CCT parameters. There were moderate-to-high TTE versus 4D-CCT correlations for left ventricular volumes, function, mass, and outflow tract dimensions (r = 0.51−0.88), though values were mostly significantly higher by 4D-CCT (p < 0.001). Compared with 4D-CCT planimetry of aortic valve area (AVA), TTE estimates had modest correlation (r = 0.37−0.43) but were significantly lower (by 0.15−0.32 cm2). The 4D-CCT estimate of LVSVi lead to significant reclassification of AS subtype defined by TTE. In conclusion, 4D-CCT quantified values were higher than TTE for the left ventricle and AVA, and the AS subtype was reclassified based on LVSVi by 4D-CCT, warranting further research to establish its clinical implications and optimal thresholds in severe AS management.

Teamwork using strain imaging in the echocardiographic assessment of right ventricular systolic function: A cardiac magnetic resonance imaging correlation study.

AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate whether conventional echocardiographic assessment of right ventricular (RV) systolic function can be improved by the addition of RV strain imaging. Additionally, we also aimed to investigate whether dedicated reading sessions and education can improve echocardiographic interpretation of RV systolic function. METHODS: Readers of varying expertise (staff echocardiologists, advanced cardiovascular imaging fellows, sonographers) assessed RV systolic function. In session 1, 20 readers graded RV function of 19 cases, using conventional measures. After dedicated education, in session 2, the same cases were reassessed, with the addition of RV strains. In session 3, 18 readers graded RV function of 20 additional cases, incorporating RV strains. Computer simulations were performed to obtain 230 random teams. RV ejection fraction (RVEF) by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) was the reference standard. RESULTS: Correlation between RV GLS and CMR-derived RVEF was moderate: Spearman's rho: 0.70, n = 19, P < 0.001 (first two sessions); 0.55, n = 20, P < 0.05 (third session). Individual readers' assessment moderately correlated with RVEF (Spearman's rho first session: 0.67 ± 0.2; second session: 0.61 ± 0.2; and third session: 0.68 ± 0.09). Team estimates of RV systolic function showed consistently better correlation with RVEF, which were improved further by averaging across all readers. RV strain parameters influenced echocardiographic interpretation, with a net reclassification index of 8.0 ± 3.6% (P = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: The RV strain parameters showed moderate correlations with CMR-derived RVEF and appropriately influenced echocardiographic interpretation of RV systolic function. "Wisdom of the crowd" applied by averaging echocardiographic assessments of RV systolic function across teams of echocardiography readers, further improved echocardiographic assessment of RV systolic function.

Impact of additive mitral valve surgery to coronary artery bypass grafting on mortality in patients with coronary artery disease and ischaemic mitral regurgitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials and observational studies.

AIMS: Treatment of ischaemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) remains controversial. While IMR is associated with worse outcomes, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies provided conflicting evidence regarding the benefit of mitral valve replacement (MVR) or repair (MVr) in addition to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We conducted a meta-analysis incorporating data from published RCTs and observational studies comparing CABG vs. CABG + MVR/MVr. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane for RCTs and observational studies comparing CABG (Group 1) vs. CABG + MVR/MVr (Group 2). Outcome was 30-day and 1-year mortality after surgical intervention. Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (OR) was calculated using random-effects meta-analysis for the outcome. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2 statistics. Four RCTs and 11 observational studies met the inclusion criteria (5781 patients, 507 in RCTs, 5274 in observational studies). Group 1 vs. 2 weighted mean left ventricular ejection fraction in RCTs and combined RCTs/observational studies was 41.5 ± 12.3 vs. 40.3 ± 10.4% ( P -value = 0.24) and 45.5 ± 7.2 vs. 38 ± 10% ( P -value < 0.001), respectively. In RCTs, there was no difference in 30-day [OR: 0.95, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.30-3.08, P = 0.94] or 1-year (OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.43-1.87, P = 0.78) mortality, respectively. For combined RCTs/observational studies, there was no difference in mortality at 30 days (OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.43-1.04, P = 0.08) or at 1 year (OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.7-1.15, P = 0.39). CONCLUSION: In a meta-analysis of RCTs and observational studies of IMR patients, the addition of MVR/MVr to CABG did not improve survival.

Outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis: Incorporation of left ventricular systolic function and stroke volume index.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess predictors of mortality in consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing aortic valve replacement and to determine whether there are differences in mortality, separated on the basis of different aortic stenosis subtypes and left ventricular stroke volume index. METHODS: We studied 875 patients (aged 69 ± 12 years, 67% were men) with severe aortic stenosis (aortic valve area ≤ 1 cm(2)) who underwent aortic valve replacement between January 2007 and December 2008 (excluding other severe valve disease, balloon aortic valvuloplasty, and transcatheter aortic valve replacement). Clinical and echocardiographic data were recorded. Left ventricular stroke volume index was measured as left ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral × left ventricular outflow tract area/body surface area. Patients were classified into the following subtypes: (1) standard severe (n = 536, left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 50% and mean gradient ≥ 40 mm Hg); (2) paradoxic severe (n = 152, left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 50%, mean gradient <40 mm Hg and left ventricular stroke volume index <35 mL/m(2)); and (3) low left ventricular ejection fraction severe (n = 187, ejection fraction <50%). Society of Thoracic Surgeons score and all-cause mortality were recorded. RESULTS: At 4.8 ± 2 years, 153 patients (18%) died (30-day mortality 1.8%). On multivariable Cox analysis, age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.49), New York Heart Association class (HR, 1.52), prior cardiac surgery (HR, 1.41), aortic stenosis subtypes (standard severe reference HR, 1; paradoxic severe HR, 1.48; and low left ventricular ejection fraction severe HR, 2.03), and reduced glomerular filtration rate (HR, 1.17) were associated with higher long-term mortality (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing aortic valve replacement, patients with standard severe aortic stenosis had better long-term survival than those with paradoxic severe or low left ventricular ejection fraction severe aortic stenosis.