Abstract
Echocardiography is the most common diagnostic modality used in the assessment of aortic stenosis (AS). However, disparity has been noted between invasive and non-invasive evaluation of AS in patients with low-output, low-gradient states. This study attempted to identify the accuracy and agreement of echocardiography in assessment of AS compared with transseptal catheterization in patients with low and preserved left ventricular (LV) systolic function. Baseline, echocardiographic and hemodynamic characteristics from one hundred patients that underwent both echocardiography and transseptal catheterization for assessment of moderate-severe AS was collected. Data from 50 patients with low LV systolic function and 50 age-matched controls with preserved LV systolic function was analysed comparing invasive and non-invasive evaluation of AVA and AS severity classification. Echocardiography had a sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of 98%, 100% and 98% respectively for classification of severe AS when compared with transseptal catheterization in patients with preserved LV systolic function. The sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of echocardiography was 83%, 44% and 78% in patients with low LV systolic function. Reclassification of AS severity after invasive assessment was significantly more common in patients with low LV systolic function (22% vs. 2%, p=0.038). Bland-Altman analysis suggested better agreement between invasive and non-invasive assessment in patients with preserved rather than low LV systolic function. Amongst patients who underwent AVR, in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in the low LV systolic function cohort (15.4% vs. 2.2%, p=0.038) No major complications were noted with transseptal catheterization. Echocardiography offers an accurate assessment of AS severity in patients with preserved LV systolic function. However, discrepancies exist between echocardiography and transseptal catheterization assessment of AS severity in patients with reduced LV systolic function, suggesting invasive evaluation of AS may be necessary in this patient population.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.