Transvalvular jet velocity, aortic valve area, mortality, and cardiovascular outcomes.

AIMS: The interplay between aortic stenosis (AS), cardiovascular events, and mortality is poorly understood. In addition, how echocardiographic indices compare for predicting outcomes remains unexplored for the full range of AS severity. METHODS AND RESULTS: We prospectively calculated peak jet velocity (Vmax) and aortic valve area (AVA) in 5994 adult subjects with and without AS. We linked ultrasound data to 5-year mortality and clinical events obtained from electronic medical records. Proportional-hazard and negative binomial regression models were adjusted for relevant covariables such as age, sex, comorbidities, stroke-volume, LV ejection fraction, left valve regurgitation, aortic valve sclerosis or calcification, and valve replacement. We observed a strong linear relationship between Vmax and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio: 1.26, 95% confidence interval: 1.19-1.33 per 100 cm/s), cardiovascular events, as well as incidental and recurrent heart failure (HF). Adjusted risks were highly significant even at Vmax values in the range of 150-200 cm/s, risk curves separating very early after the index exam. Vmax was not associated with coronary, arrhythmic, cerebrovascular, or non-cardiovascular events. Although risks were confirmed when AVA was entered in place of Vmax, the risks estimated for categories based on the two indices were mismatched, even in patients with normal flow. An external cohort comprising 112 690 patients confirmed augmented risks of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality starting at values of Vmax and AVA in the range of mild AS. CONCLUSIONS: Aortic stenosis is strongly associated to all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and cardiac events, specifically HF. Risks increase in parallel to the degree of outflow obstruction but are apparent very early in patients with mild disease. Criteria for grading AS based on Vmax and AVA are mismatched in terms of outcomes.

Valve area and the risk of overestimating aortic stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: To obtain reference values of aortic valve area (AVA) in a large population and to infer the risk of overestimating aortic stenosis (AS) when focusing on flow-corrected indices of severity. METHODS: We prospectively measured indices of AS in all consecutive echocardiograms performed in a large referral cardiac imaging laboratory for 1 year. We specifically analysed the distribution of AVA, indexed AVA and velocity ratio (Vratio) in patients with and without AS, the latter defined as the coexistence of valvular outflow obstruction (Vmax ≥2.5 m/s) and morphological findings of valve degeneration. RESULTS: 16 156 echocardiograms were analysed, 14 669 of which did not show valvular obstruction (peak jet velocity <2.5 m/s). In the latter group, AVA was 2.6±0.7 cm2 in 8190 studies with normal valves and 2.3±0.7 cm2 in 6479 studies with aortic sclerosis (AScl). There was a relatively wide overlap between values of AVA, indexed AVA and velocity ratio between studies of patients with AScl and AS. Values of AVA ≤1.0 cm2 were found in 0.5% of studies with normal valves and 1.8% of studies with AScl. These proportions were 3.1% and 9.3% for AVA ≤1.5 cm2, respectively. Vratio ≤0.25 were found in 0.1% of patients without obstruction. Risk factors for a small AVA in patients without obstruction were AScl, female sex, small body surface area, low ejection fraction and mitral regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: Normal values of continuity-equation derived AVA are smaller than previously considered. AVA values below cutoffs of moderate or severe AS can be found in patients without the disease. Flow-corrected indices may overestimate AS in patients with low gradients, particularly in the presence of well-identified risk factors.