Coronary Artery Disease Assessed by Computed Tomography-Based Leaman Score in Patients With Low-Risk Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

We aimed to evaluate the burden of coronary artery disease (CAD) using the computed tomography (CT) Leaman score in low-risk transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients. The extent of CAD in low-risk patients with aortic stenosis who are candidates for TAVI has not been accurately quantified. The CT Leaman score was developed to quantify coronary CT angiography (CCTA) atherosclerotic burden and has been validated to evaluate the extent of CAD. CT Leaman score >5 has been associated with an increase in major adverse cardiac events over long-term follow-up. The study population included patients enrolled in the Low Risk TAVI trial who underwent CCTA before the procedure. For the CT Leaman score, we used 3 sets of weighting factors: (1) location of coronary plaques, (2) type of plaque, and (3) degree of stenosis. A total of 200 patients were enrolled in the Low Risk TAVI trial. Excluded were 31 patients who had no analyzable CCTA imaging. For the remaining 169 patients, the mean CT Leaman score was 6.27 ± 0.27, of whom 102 (60.4%) had CT Leaman score >5. Nearly all analyzed patients (97%) had coronary plaques. Furthermore, 33 patients (19.5%) had potentially obstructive coronary plaques (>50% stenosis by CCTA) in proximal segments. Most low-risk TAVI patients have significant CAD burden by CCTA. It should be a priority for future TAVI devices to guarantee unimpeded access to the coronary arteries for selective angiography and interventions.

Evaluation and Management of Concomitant Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy and Valvular Aortic Stenosis.

OPINION STATEMENT: The dilemma of the patient with both AS and LVOTO is now commonly encountered in clinical practice; indeed, physicians must be aware of the complex interaction and coexistent nature of both diseases, especially as both HOCM and TAVR have increased in awareness and prevalence. Importantly, the clinician must be aware of the complex interplay hemodynamically, with the two diseases confusing the TTE imaging and potentially affecting each other anatomically and clinically. There is no set guideline on how to approach this from a surgical or percutaneous approach, but we have outlined a set of recommendations which should serve the clinician and patient well. The three cases that are presented illustrate that methodical diagnosis in addition to the order of treatment do indeed matter. In the first case, there was AS and an underestimated LVOT gradient that was also present. Once the AS was corrected, the true LVOT gradient potential was evidenced and she decompensated, likely because there was a rapid decrease in afterload. Patients with concomitant LVOTO are not able to adjust quickly to the hemodynamic changes created by the rapid decline in afterload, as, for example, in HOCM patients who receive nitroglycerin. The second case demonstrated that when the LVOTO was severe and the AS nonsignificant (mild or moderate), the patient was able to live without symptoms for several years after successful alcohol septal ablation (ASA). She eventually needed an aortic valve and mitral valve replacement but that was postponed for several years until the AS became more significant, and the surgical risk was lowered by the elimination of the need for concomitant myectomy. In the last case, the patient was able to have both an ASA and TAVR within 3 months of each other without hemodynamic compromise. Indeed, this latter therapy sequence may be the best way to treat patients with both diseases in the future, as both ASA and TAVR continue to evolve into intermediate and lower-risk patient populations and the safety of ASA continues to be evident.