Search

BACKGROUND Hypertensive patients are at increased risk of diastolic dysfunction. The hypothesis of this study was that addition of amlodipine would be superior to valsartan in improving diastolic dysfunction associated with hypertension. METHODS In this randomized trial, we randomly assigned 104 controlled, hypertensive patients with diastolic dysfunction to receive either amlodipine 2.5 mg or valsartan 40 mg, in addition to antihypertensive therapy. The primary end point was the change in the ratio of early mitral inflow velocity to early mitral annular relaxation velocity (E/E') from baseline to the 6-month follow-up. Secondary end points included changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP), left ventricular (LV) mass index, and left atrial volume index. RESULTS SBP decreased significantly from baseline in both treatment groups (p < 0.001). E/E' decreased significantly from 13.0 ± 2.2 to 12.0 ± 2.7 in the amlodipine arm and from 14.4 ± 4.3 to 12.7 ± 3.7 in the valsartan arm (p < 0.01 in both groups). The change of E/E' was not significantly different between treatment groups (p = 0.25). There were also no significant between-group differences regarding the changes in SBP, LV mass index, and left atrial volume index. Two patients (3.8%) in the amlodipine group and 1 (16%) in the valsartan group had serious adverse event. CONCLUSIONS In this randomized trial involving controlled hypertensive patients, addition of amlodipine or valsartan was associated with an improvement of diastolic dysfunction, but the effects on diastolic dysfunction did not differ significantly between the treatment groups.

BACKGROUND Although bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is one of the most common congenital heart diseases, clinical outcome data regarding BAV are still limited. We evaluated clinical characteristics and mid-term clinical outcomes of asymptomatic Korean patients with bicuspid aortic valve. METHODS We initiated a prospective registry in 2014 at a tertiary referral hospital. To develop a cohort of asymptomatic patients, we excluded patients who previously underwent open heart surgery (OHS) or who had OHS within 6 months of referral. RESULTS A total of 170 patients (117 male [69%], age 50 ± 13 years) were enrolled. More than 70% (n = 124, 73%) were incidentally diagnosed with BAV during routine health examinations or preoperative screening for non-cardiac surgery. At the time of enrollment, moderate to severe aortic stenosis (AS) or regurgitation (AR) was present in 77 patients (45%) and 98 (58%) showed aortic dilation: 42 (25%) had non-significant valvular dysfunction without aortic dilation. During a median follow-up of 4 years, AS severity increased significantly (p < 0.001), while there was no significant change in AR severity (p = 0.361). A total of 27 patients (16%) underwent OHS, including isolated aortic valve (AV) surgery (n = 11, 41%), AV with combined aortic surgery (n = 12, 44%), and isolated aortic surgery (n = 4, 15%): no patient developed aortic dissection. Moderate to severe AS (hazard ratio [HR] 4.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.83-11.62; p = 0.001), NYHA class ≥ 2 (HR 2.53; 95% CI 1.01-6.35; p = 0.048) and aortic dilation (HR 2.13; 95% CI 0.87-5.21; p = 0.099) were associated with surgical events. CONCLUSIONS Progression patterns of valvular dysfunction and impacts of BAV phenotype on OHS should be explored in future studies with longer follow-up durations.

Background Overestimation of the severity of mitral regurgitation (MR) by the proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) method has been reported. We sought to test whether angle correction (AC) of the constrained flow field is helpful to eliminate overestimation in patients with eccentric MR. Methods In a total of 33 patients with MR due to prolapse or flail mitral valve, both echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance image (CMR) were performed to calculate regurgitant volume (RV). In addition to RV by conventional PISA (RVPISA), convergence angle (α) was measured from 2-dimensional Doppler color flow maps and RV was corrected by multiplying by α/180 (RVAC). RV measured by CMR (RVCMR) was used as a gold standard, which was calculated by the difference between total stroke volume measured by planimetry of the short axis slices and aortic stroke volume by phase-contrast image. Results The correlation between RVCMR and RV by echocardiography was modest [RVCMR vs. RVPISA (r = 0.712, p < 0.001) and RVCMR vs. RVAC (r = 0.766, p < 0.001)]. However, RVPISA showed significant overestimation (RVPISA - RVCMR = 50.6 ± 40.6 mL vs. RVAC - RVCMR = 7.7 ± 23.4 mL, p < 0.001). The overall accuracy of RVPISA for diagnosis of severe MR, defined as RV ≥ 60 mL, was 57.6% (19/33), whereas it increased to 84.8% (28/33) by using RVAC (p = 0.028). Conclusion Conventional PISA method tends to provide falsely large RV in patients with eccentric MR and a simple geometric AC of the proximal constraint flow largely eliminates overestimation.