Assessment of diastolic function in aortic stenosis: A comparison between 2009 and 2016 guidelines.

AIMS: New diastolic dysfunction (DD) guidelines were introduced in 2016 to replace the 2009 guidelines, but have not yet been evaluated in aortic stenosis (AS). We aimed to compare the 2009 and 2016 DD guidelines in severe AS patients in terms of association with left ventricular (LV) and left atrial (LA) remodeling, with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) at rest and exercise, and with prognosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: We included 212 patients with severe AS (112 undergoing AVR, 100 asymptomatic). Echocardiography, magnetic resonance imaging, and brain natriuretic peptides (BNP) were performed/measured. Thirty-nine asymptomatic patients had PCWP measured during rest and maximal exertion. Asymptomatic patients were followed for 3.1 years for the combined endpoint of death, AVR or admission with heart failure. The 2009 and 2016 DD guidelines agreed poorly with each other (Cohens' κ = .15). 2009 guidelines showed many ambiguous DD findings. With the 2016 guidelines, 20% of patients had indeterminate DD. DD grade 2 according to 2016 guidelines showed stronger association with symptom status, BNP, global longitudinal strain (GLS) and peak exercise PCWP than 2009 guidelines. For indeterminate DD patients according to 2009 guidelines, GLS above the median was associated with event-free survival (HR .11 (95% CI .02-.53)). For neither guideline was DD associated with the combined endpoint in asymptomatic patients. CONCLUSION: The 2016 guidelines show a stronger association with BNP, GLS, and exercise PCWP than the 2009 guidelines. The 2016 guidelines result in 20% of patients with indeterminate DD; however, these patients may possibly be stratified according to GLS.

Assessment of patients with a suspected cardioembolic ischemic stroke. A national consensus statement.

OBJECTIVES: Several cardiovascular, structural, and functional abnormalities have been considered as potential causes of cardioembolic ischemic strokes. Beyond atrial fibrillation, other sources of embolism clearly exist and may warrant urgent action, but they are only a minor part of the many stroke mechanisms and strokes that seem to be of embolic origin remain without a determined source. The associations between stroke and findings like atrial fibrillation, valve calcification, or heart failure are confounded by co-existing risk factors for atherosclerosis and vascular disease. In addition, a patent foramen ovale which is a common abnormality in the general population is mostly an innocent bystander in patients with ischemic stroke. For these reasons, experts from the national Danish societies of cardiology, neurology, stroke, and neuroradiology sought to develop a consensus document to provide national recommendations on how to manage patients with a suspected cardioembolic stroke. Design: Comprehensive literature search and analyses were done by a panel of experts and presented at a consensus meeting. Evidence supporting each subject was vetted by open discussion and statements were adjusted thereafter. Results: The most common sources of embolic stroke were identified, and the statement provides advise on how neurologist can identify cases that need referral, and what is expected by the cardiologist. Conclusions: A primary neurological and neuroradiological assessment is mandatory and neurovascular specialists should manage the initiation of secondary prophylactic treatment. If a cardioembolic stroke is suspected, a dedicated cardiologist experienced in the management of cardioembolism should provide a tailored clinical and echocardiographic assessment.

Assessment of Subclinical Left Ventricular Dysfunction in Aortic Stenosis.

Left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction is an adverse consequence of the pressure overload of severe aortic stenosis (AS). The enlargement of the interstitial space with reactive fibrosis and subsequently with replacement fibrosis and cell death has been suggested to be the main driver of the transition to symptoms, heart failure, and adverse cardiovascular events even after aortic valve replacement (AVR). Early and accurate recognition of myocardial dysfunction offers the potential to optimize the timing of intervention in severe AS. In the asymptomatic patient, an LV ejection fraction (EF) cutpoint of <50% has been used for this purpose. However, in most asymptomatic patients, an LVEF <50% is uncommon, and patients with an LVEF of 50% to 59% fare almost as badly. Moreover, the presence of a small LV cavity, the reliability and automation of the global longitudinal strain (GLS) signal, and the independent prognostic role of GLS are reasons why GLS could be expected to be a better marker of subclinical LV dysfunction in these patients. This review seeks to define whether the existing EF cutoff in AS should be modified or whether GLS should replace it as the marker of subclinical LV dysfunction.

Noninvasive assessment of filling pressure and left atrial pressure overload in severe aortic valve stenosis: relation to ventricular remodeling and clinical outcome after aortic valve replacement.

OBJECTIVE: One of the hemodynamic consequences of aortic valve stenosis is pressure overload leading to left atrial dilatation. Left atrial size is a known risk factor providing prognostic information in several cardiac conditions. It is not known if this is also the case in patients with aortic valve stenosis after aortic valve replacement. METHODS: A total of 119 patients with severe aortic valve stenosis scheduled for aortic valve replacement were evaluated preoperatively and divided into 2 groups according to left atrial volume index (≥40 mL/m(2)). Echocardiography was repeated 12 months after surgery. Patients were followed up for 24 months. The primary end point was the composite end point overall mortality and hospitalization due to congestive heart failure. RESULTS: Preoperative left atrial dilation was associated with left ventricular hypertrophy and increased filling pressure. Preoperative left atrial volume index was associated with persistent abnormalities in left ventricular filling pressure and left ventricular mass index at 1 year after surgery. Event-free survival in patients with left atrial volume index of 40 mL/m(2) or more at 1 year was 71% compared with 88% in patients with left atrial volume index less than 40 mL/m(2) (P = .002). Patients with preoperative increased E/e' ratio and left ventricular hypertrophy were at increased risk. In Cox regression analysis after correcting for standard risk factors, left atrial volume index was found to be the only significant predictor of the composite end point. In a forward conditional multivariable model, left atrial volume index 40 mL/m(2) or greater (hazard ratio, 4.2 [1.6-10.7]; P = .003) remained an independent predictor, whereas E/e' was borderline significant (P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis undergoing aortic valve replacement, left atrial volume provides important prognostic information beyond standard risk factors.