Diagnostic Challenges in Aortic Stenosis.

Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most prevalent degenerative valvular disease in western countries. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is considered, nowadays, to be the main imaging technique for the work-up of AS due to high availability, safety, low cost, and excellent capacity to evaluate aortic valve (AV) morphology and function. Despite the diagnosis of AS being considered straightforward for a very long time, based on high gradients and reduced aortic valve area (AVA), many patients with AS represent a real dilemma for cardiologist. On the one hand, the acoustic window may be inadequate and the TTE limited in some cases. On the other hand, a growing body of evidence shows that patients with low gradients (due to systolic dysfunction, concentric hypertrophy or coexistence of another valve disease such as mitral stenosis or regurgitation) may develop severe AS (low-flow low-gradient severe AS) with a similar or even worse prognosis. The use of complementary imaging techniques such as transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), multidetector computed tomography (MDTC), or cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) plays a key role in such scenarios. The aim of this review is to summarize the diagnostic challenges associated with patients with AS and the advantages of a comprehensive multimodality cardiac imaging (MCI) approach to reach a precise grading of the disease, a crucial factor to warrant an adequate management of patients.

Value of non-apical echocardiographic views in the up-grading of patients with aortic stenosis.

Purpose. Echocardiography assessment from apical five-chamber view (A5CV) is the standard technique for aortic stenosis (AS) grading. Data on non-apical views, such as right parasternal (RPV), subcostal (SCV) and suprasternal notch (SSNV), is scarce and constitutes the aim of our study. Methods. We designed an observational study that included patients with AS recruited prospectively in whom the stenosis was graded by echocardiography from A5CV and non-apical view. The value of non-apical views in up-grading the stenosis severity (primary objective), the prognostic relevance of such reclassification and the feasibility and reproducibility of non-apical views assessment (secondary objectives) was evaluated. Results. Feasibility of AS appraisal from RPV, SCV and SSNV was 78%, 81% and 56%, respectively (SCV vs SSNV, p = .009). AS were up-graded from non-apical views according to peak gradient, mean gradient, area and indexed area by 24%, 17%, 24% and 22%, respectively (p < .0001). Non-apical views reclassified from non-severe to severe AS, from low gradient severe to high gradient severe AS and from non-critical to critical AS 19%, 23% and 3% of cases (p < .0001). The 4-years hard cardiac events rate was 41% in patients with non-severe AS, 67% in patients with severe AS from non-apical views, 68% in patients with severe AS from A5CV and 80% in patients with severe AS from A5CV and non-apical views (p < .001). Reproducibility of AS evaluation from non-apical views was fair to excellent (intraclass correlation coefficients: SSNV = 0.44, RPV = 0.61, SCV = 0.92). Conclusion. Assessment of AS from non-apical views is feasible, reproducible and valuable over A5CV; its use is encouraged.