Valvular & structural heart disease
Difference in cardiac response after transcatheter aortic valve implantation according to flow and gradient pattern
Authors' conclusion
During 1 year post-TAVI, compared with HG-AS, cLFLG-AS achieves smaller LV diameters, greater increase in LVEF, and comparable regression of LVMi, whereas pLFLG-AS does not.
Study context
- Population
- Patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for severe aortic stenosis (AS), 2013–2019
- Participants
- 4,523 patients
- Exposure
- Classical low-flow low-gradient AS (cLFLG-AS) and paradoxical low-flow low-gradient AS (pLFLG-AS) vs high-gradient AS (HG-AS)
- HG-ASn = 3,697reference
- cLFLG-ASn = 507
- pLFLG-ASn = 319
- Outcome
- Change in cardiac structure and function on echocardiography (LVDs, LVDd, LVEF, LVMi, SVi)
- Follow-up
- 1 year post-TAVI
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Echocardiographic change vs HG-AS
- cLFLG-AS: greater reduction of LVDs and LV diastolic diameter (LVDd) and greater increase of LVEF
- P < 0.001 for all
- cLFLG-AS: comparable change in LV mass index (LVMi)
- P = 0.915
- cLFLG-AS: comparable change in stroke volume index (SVi)
- P = 0.821
- pLFLG-AS: less reduction of LVDs
- P = 0.039
- pLFLG-AS: less reduction of LVDd
- P = 0.001
- pLFLG-AS: less improvement of LVEF
- P = 0.045
- pLFLG-AS: less improvement of LVMi
- P < 0.001
- pLFLG-AS: comparable change in SVi
- P = 0.364
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
All-cause mortality (adjusted) · 2 years
- cLFLG-AS and pLFLG-AS ∼1.5-fold higher vs HG-AS
- Adjusted for clinical factors
Original publication
Difference in cardiac response after transcatheter aortic valve implantation according to flow and gradient pattern. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. Published 10 September 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →