Kristian B Laursen, Rasmus Carter-Storch, Patricia A Pellikka, Mulham Ali, Nils S B Mogensen, Kristian A Øvrehus, Marie-Annick Clavel, Jordi S Dahl
{"title":"Changes in afterload and contractility in patients with severe aortic stenosis after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.","authors":"Kristian B Laursen, Rasmus Carter-Storch, Patricia A Pellikka, Mulham Ali, Nils S B Mogensen, Kristian A Øvrehus, Marie-Annick Clavel, Jordi S Dahl","doi":"10.1093/ehjimp/qyaf063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>In aortic stenosis (AS), estimation of left ventricular (LV) contractility is difficult as most markers of systolic LV function are load-dependent. The ratio of LV ejection fraction (LVEF) to end-systolic wall stress (ESWS), has been widely accepted as a marker of contractility. However, no studies have evaluated if this ratio is affected by loading conditions. The study describes changes in ESWS and ESWS corrected LVEF after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>In this prospective study, 41 patients with severe AS underwent echocardiography, LV catheterisation, and computed tomography (CT) before and immediately after TAVR. ESWS was estimated from echocardiography alone (ESWS<sub>Echo</sub>), combining CT LV dimensions and echocardiographic gradients (ESWS<sub>CT</sub> <sub>+</sub> <sub>echo</sub>) and combining CT LV dimensions and invasively measured LV end-systolic pressure (ESWS<sub>CT</sub> <sub>+</sub> <sub>Invasive</sub>). ESWS<sub>echo</sub>, ESWS<sub>CT</sub> <sub>+</sub> <sub>echo</sub> and ESWS<sub>CT</sub> <sub>+</sub> <sub>Invasive</sub> all decreased significantly after TAVR (89 ± 48 vs. 57 ± 37 Kdynes/cm<sup>2</sup>, <i>P</i> < 0.01; 69 ± 8 vs. 51 ± 8 Kdynes/cm<sup>2</sup>, <i>P</i> < 0.01, and 197 ± 69 vs. 137 ± 48 Kpa/cm<sup>2</sup>, <i>P</i> < 0.01, respectively). We observed weak to moderate associations between the methods. After TAVR, LVEF corrected to ESWS<sub>echo</sub>, ESWS<sub>CT</sub> <sub>+</sub> <sub>echo</sub> and ESWS<sub>CT</sub> <sub>+</sub> <sub>Invasive</sub> increased (0.93 ± 0.07 vs. 1.91 ± 2.1, <i>P</i> = 0.013; 0.36 ± 0.19 vs. 0.58 ± 0.33, <i>P</i> < 0.01, and 0.3 ± 0.02 vs. 2.5 ± 1.5, <i>P</i> < 0.01, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ESWS<sub>echo</sub>, ESWS<sub>CT</sub> <sub>+</sub> <sub>echo</sub> and ESWS<sub>CT</sub> <sub>+</sub> <sub>Invasive</sub> decreased significantly after TAVR suggesting they reflect afterload, but independent of method, ESWS corrected LVEF increased slightly post-TAVR, indicating load dependency.</p>","PeriodicalId":94317,"journal":{"name":"European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice","volume":"3 1","pages":"qyaf063"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12142310/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjimp/qyaf063","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: In aortic stenosis (AS), estimation of left ventricular (LV) contractility is difficult as most markers of systolic LV function are load-dependent. The ratio of LV ejection fraction (LVEF) to end-systolic wall stress (ESWS), has been widely accepted as a marker of contractility. However, no studies have evaluated if this ratio is affected by loading conditions. The study describes changes in ESWS and ESWS corrected LVEF after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).
Methods and results: In this prospective study, 41 patients with severe AS underwent echocardiography, LV catheterisation, and computed tomography (CT) before and immediately after TAVR. ESWS was estimated from echocardiography alone (ESWSEcho), combining CT LV dimensions and echocardiographic gradients (ESWSCT+echo) and combining CT LV dimensions and invasively measured LV end-systolic pressure (ESWSCT+Invasive). ESWSecho, ESWSCT+echo and ESWSCT+Invasive all decreased significantly after TAVR (89 ± 48 vs. 57 ± 37 Kdynes/cm2, P < 0.01; 69 ± 8 vs. 51 ± 8 Kdynes/cm2, P < 0.01, and 197 ± 69 vs. 137 ± 48 Kpa/cm2, P < 0.01, respectively). We observed weak to moderate associations between the methods. After TAVR, LVEF corrected to ESWSecho, ESWSCT+echo and ESWSCT+Invasive increased (0.93 ± 0.07 vs. 1.91 ± 2.1, P = 0.013; 0.36 ± 0.19 vs. 0.58 ± 0.33, P < 0.01, and 0.3 ± 0.02 vs. 2.5 ± 1.5, P < 0.01, respectively).
Conclusion: ESWSecho, ESWSCT+echo and ESWSCT+Invasive decreased significantly after TAVR suggesting they reflect afterload, but independent of method, ESWS corrected LVEF increased slightly post-TAVR, indicating load dependency.