Search

Background and PurposePrognostic models based on cardiovascular hemodynamic parameters may bring new information for an early assessment of patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), playing a key role in reducing the long-term risk of cardiovascular events. This work quantifies several three-dimensional hemodynamic parameters in different patients with BAV and ranks their relationships with aortic diameter.Materials and MethodsUsing 4D-flow CMR data of 74 patients with BAV (49 right-left and 25 right-non-coronary) and 48 healthy volunteers, aortic 3D maps of seventeen 17 different hemodynamic parameters were quantified along the thoracic aorta. Patients with BAV were divided into two morphotype categories, BAV-Non-AAoD (where we include 18 non-dilated patients and 7 root-dilated patients) and BAV-AAoD (where we include the 49 patients with dilatation of the ascending aorta). Differences between volunteers and patients were evaluated using MANOVA with Pillai's trace statistic, Mann–Whitney U test, ROC curves, and minimum redundancy maximum relevance algorithm. Spearman's correlation was used to correlate the dilation with each hemodynamic parameter.ResultsThe flow eccentricity, backward velocity, velocity angle, regurgitation fraction, circumferential wall shear stress, axial vorticity, and axial circulation allowed to discriminate between volunteers and patients with BAV, even in the absence of dilation. In patients with BAV, the diameter presented a strong correlation (> |+/−0.7|) with the forward velocity and velocity angle, and a good correlation (> |+/−0.5|) with regurgitation fraction, wall shear stress, wall shear stress axial, and vorticity, also for morphotypes and phenotypes, some of them are correlated with the diameter. The velocity angle proved to be an excellent biomarker in the differentiation between volunteers and patients with BAV, BAV morphotypes, and BAV phenotypes, with an area under the curve bigger than 0.90, and higher predictor important scores.ConclusionsThrough the application of a novel 3D quantification method, hemodynamic parameters related to flow direction, such as flow eccentricity, velocity angle, and regurgitation fraction, presented the best relationships with a local diameter and effectively differentiated patients with BAV from healthy volunteers.

ObjectivesTo determine the risk of mortality and need for aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with low-flow low-gradient (LFLG) aortic stenosis (AS).MethodsA longitudinal multicentre study including consecutive patients with severe AS (aortic valve area [AVA] < 1.0 cm2) and normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Patients were classified as: high-gradient (HG, mean gradient ≥ 40 mmHg), normal-flow low-gradient (NFLG, mean gradient < 40 mmHg, indexed systolic volume (SVi) > 35 ml/m2) and LFLG (mean gradient < 40 mmHg, SVi ≤ 35 ml/m2).ResultsOf 1,391 patients, 147 (10.5%) had LFLG, 752 (54.1%) HG, and 492 (35.4%) NFLG. Echocardiographic parameters of the LFLG group showed similar AVA to the HG group but with less severity in the dimensionless index, calcification, and hypertrophy. The HG group required AVR earlier than NFLG (p < 0.001) and LFLG (p < 0.001), with no differences between LFLG and NFLG groups (p = 0.358). Overall mortality was 27.7% (CI 95% 25.3–30.1) with no differences among groups (p = 0.319). The impact of AVR in terms of overall mortality reduction was observed the most in patients with HG (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.12–0.23; p < 0.001), followed by patients with LFLG (HR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.13–0.49; p < 0.001), and finally patients with NFLG (HR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.20–0.44; p < 0.001), with a risk reduction of 84, 75, and 71%, respectively.ConclusionsParadoxical LFLG AS affects 10.5% of severe AS, and has a lower need for AVR than the HG group and similar to the NFLG group, with no differences in mortality. AVR had a lower impact on LFLG AS compared with HG AS. Therefore, the findings of the present study showed LFLG AS to have an intermediate clinical risk profile between the HG and NFHG groups.