Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Circulation
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Circulation. 2008;118:S234-S242
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.757427
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Clavel, M.-A.
Right arrow Articles by Pibarot, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Clavel, M.-A.
Right arrow Articles by Pibarot, P.
Related Collections
Right arrow Valvular heart disease
Right arrow Echocardiography
Right arrow CV surgery: valvular disease

(Circulation. 2008;118:S234-S242.)
© 2008 American Heart Association, Inc.


Surgery for Valvular Heart Disease

Predictors of Outcomes in Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis

Results of the Multicenter TOPAS Study

Marie-Annick Clavel, DVM; Christina Fuchs, MD; Ian G. Burwash, MD; Gerald Mundigler, MD; Jean G. Dumesnil, MD, FRCPC, FACC; Helmut Baumgartner, MD; Jutta Bergler-Klein, MD; Rob S. Beanlands, MD; Patrick Mathieu, MD; Julien Magne, MSc; Philippe Pibarot, DVM, PhD, FACC, FAHA

From the Laval Hospital Research Center/Québec Heart Institute (M.A.C., C.F., J.M., J.G.D., P.M., P.P.), Laval University, Québec, Canada; Vienna General Hospital (C.F., G.M., H.B., J.B.K.), Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; and the University of Ottawa Heart Institute (I.G.B., R.B.), Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Correspondence to Philippe Pibarot, DVM, PhD, FACC, FAHA, Laval Hospital, 2725 Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec, Quebec, Canada, G1V-4G5. E-mail philippe.pibarot{at}med.ulaval.ca

Background— Patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis have a poor prognosis with conservative therapy but a high operative mortality if treated surgically. Recently, we proposed a new index of aortic stenosis severity derived from dobutamine stress echocardiography, the projected aortic valve area at a normal transvalvular flow rate, as superior to other conventional indices to differentiate true-severe from pseudosevere aortic stenosis. The objective of this study was to identify the determinants of survival, functional status, and change in left ventricular ejection fraction during follow-up of patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis.

Methods and Results— One hundred one patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis (aortic valve area ≤1.2 cm2, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%, and mean gradient ≤40 mm Hg) underwent dobutamine stress echocardiography and an assessment of functional capacity using the Duke Activity Status Index. A subset of 72 patients also underwent a 6-minute walk test. Overall survival was 70±5% at 1 year and 57±6% at 3 years. After adjusting for age, gender, and the type of treatment (aortic valve replacement versus no aortic valve replacement), significant predictors of mortality during follow-up were a Duke Activity Status Index ≤20 (P=0.0005) or 6-minute walk test distance ≤320 m (P<0.0001, in the subset of 72 patients), projected aortic valve area at a normal transvalvular flow rate ≤1.2 cm2 (P=0.03), and peak dobutamine stress echocardiography left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% (P=0.03). More severe stenosis, defined as projected aortic valve area ≤1.2 cm2, was a predictor of mortality only in the no aortic valve replacement group. The Duke Activity Status Index, 6-minute walk test, and left ventricular ejection fraction improved significantly during follow-up in the aortic valve replacement group, but remained unchanged or decreased in the no aortic valve replacement group.

Conclusion— In patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis, the most significant risk factors for poor outcome were (1) impaired functional capacity as measured by Duke Activity Status Index or 6-minute walk test distance; (2) more severe valve stenosis as measured by projected aortic valve area at a normal transvalvular flow rate; and (3) reduced peak stress left ventricular ejection fraction, a composite measure accounting for both resting left ventricular function and contractile reserve.


Key Words: aortic stenosis • Doppler echocardiography • hemodynamics • LV dysfunction • survival