Combined Cardiac Damage Staging by Echocardiography and Cardiac Catheterization in Patients With Clinically Significant Aortic Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac damage (CD) staging enhances risk stratification in patients with clinically significant aortic stenosis (AS). We aimed to assess the prognostic value and reclassification rate of right heart catheterization (RHC) compared with transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in characterising CD staging at 3-year follow-up in patients with clinically significant AS, to identify patients that would benefit from RHC for prognostic stratification, and to test the prognostic value of combined CD staging. METHODS: An observational cohort study of 432 AS patients undergoing TTE and RHC were divided into moderate or asymptomatic severe (m/asAS) and symptomatic severe (ssAS) AS. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to compare survival. The accuracy in prognostic stratification was tested by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and Delong test. RESULTS: In both cohorts, TTE- and RHC-derived staging systems had prognostic value, although the agreement between them appeared moderate. A higher proportion of patients were assigned to stage 2 by TTE than by RHC. Patients in TTE-derived stage 2 had a high reclassification rate, with 40%-50% presenting with right chamber involvement (stages 3-4) according to RHC. Discordant cases were significantly older, with higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation, markedly elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and higher indexed left atrial volume, E/e', and systolic pulmonary artery pressure vs concordant cases (P < 0.05). The combined CD staging, integrating TTE and RHC, was more accurate in predicting mortality than the TTE-derived system (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with m/asAS and ssAS, the combined CD staging, derived from TTE and RHC, was more accurate in predicting mortality than TTE alone. In a subset of AS patients, the integration of RHC may significantly improve prognostic stratification.

Association of Mild-to-Moderate Aortic Regurgitation With Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.

OBJECTIVE: To assess aortic regurgitation (AR) prevalence, its hemodynamic effect, and long-term prognostic implications in patients admitted with de novo or worsened heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). METHODS: Consecutive patients hospitalized with de novo or worsened HFpEF between 2014 and 2020 were enrolled. Patients with more than moderate aortic and/or mitral valve disease were excluded. Based on the presence and degree of AR, patients were divided into those without AR, those with mild, and those with moderate AR. Data on cardiovascular death, heart failure (HF) rehospitalization, and their composite (major adverse cardiovascular events) were collected. RESULTS: The final study population consisted of 458 HFpEF patients: 156 (34.1%) with mild-AR, 153 (33.4%) with moderate-AR, and the remaining 149 (32.5%) with no AR. Mild-to-moderate AR patients were older, with larger left atrium-left ventricle (LV) volumes, greater LV mass index, higher filling pressure, and prevalence of diastolic dysfunction compared with the no-AR group (all P<.05). During 5-year follow-up, 113 patients died of cardiovascular causes, 124 patients were rehospitalized for HF, whereas 196 experienced the composite endpoint. Mild-to-moderate AR was identified as an independent predictor of all-cause death (HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.58; P=.04) and major adverse cardiovascular event occurrence (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.05 to 2.09; P=.02). A total of 126 (35.5%) of 355 patients showed progression of AR at follow-up echocardiography. CONCLUSION: Mild-to-moderate AR is common among patients hospitalized for HFpEF. It is associated with adverse LV remodeling and worse long-term outcomes. These findings warrant further prospective studies addressing the importance of AR in prognostic stratification and exploring therapeutic strategies to mitigate its hemodynamic effect on HF.