Is the Corrected Carotid Flow Time a Clinically Acceptable Surrogate Hemodynamic Parameter for the Left Ventricular Ejection Time?

Objective: The corrected left ventricular ejection time (cLVET) comprises the phase from aortic valve opening to aortic valve closure corrected for heart rate. As a surrogate measure for cLVET, the corrected carotid flow time (ccFT) has been proposed in previous research. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical agreement between cLVET and ccFT in a dynamic clinical setting. Methods: Twenty-five patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (AS) were selected for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The cLVET and ccFT were derived from the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) and the common carotid artery (CCA), respectively, using pulsed wave Doppler ultrasound. Bazett's (B) and Wodey's (W) equations were used to calculate cLVET and ccFT. Measurements were performed directly before (T1) and after (T2) TAVR. Correlation, Bland–Altman and concordance analyses were performed. Results: Corrected LVET decreased from T1 to T2 (p &lt; 0.001), with relative reductions of 11% (B) and 9% (W). Corrected carotid flow time decreased (p &lt; 0.001), with relative reductions of 12% (B) and 10% (W). The correlation between cLVET and ccFT was strong for B (ρ = 0.74, p &lt; 0.001) and W (ρ = 0.81, p &lt; 0.001). The bias was –39 ms (B) and –37 ms (W), and the upper and lower levels of agreement were 19 and –98 ms (B) and 5 and –78 ms (W), respectively. Trending ability between cLVET and ccFT was good (concordance 96%) for both B and W. Conclusion: In TAVR patients, the clinical agreement between cLVET and ccFT was acceptable, indicating that ccFT could serve as a surrogate measure for cLVET.</p

Continuous thermodilution and microvascular resistance reserve during the index procedure in acute coronary syndrome without obstructive coronary artery disease:A pilot study

Background: In 5%−25% of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, coronary angiography reveals no obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA). Coronary microvascular disease (CMD) is a potential causal pathophysiological mechanism in these patients and can be diagnosed by continuous thermodilution assessment. Recently, the microvascular resistance reserve (MRR) has been introduced as a novel index to assess the vasodilatory capacity of the microcirculation. However, continuous thermodilution and MRR have never been investigated in the acute setting in MINOCA patients and invasive assessment of the microcirculation in these patients are currently lacking. Aims: The objectives of the study were to investigate the incidence of CMD (MRR ≤ 2.7) in patients with MINOCA and to evaluate the feasibility and safety of continuous thermodilution-based assessment during index coronary angiography in the acute setting. Methods: This study was a prospective, observational, pilot study investigating coronary physiology in the acute setting in MINOCA patients. Patients admitted with a diagnosis of NSTE-ACS were eligible for inclusion. Results: In total, 19 MINOCA patients were included in this analysis; the mean age was 70 ± 9 years, and 79% were females. CMD was present in 6 patients (32%). Qrest was significantly higher in the MRR ≤ 2.7 group compared to the MRR &gt; 2.7 group (0.076 [0.057−0.100] vs. 0.049 [0.044−0.071] L/min, p = 0.03). Rµ,rest was significantly lower in the MRR ≤ 2.7 group compared to the MRR &gt; 2.7 group (1083 [710−1510] vs. 1563 [1298−1970] WU, p = 0.04). No periprocedural complications or hemodynamic instability have occurred during continuous thermodilution assessment during the index coronary angiography. Conclusion: In patients admitted for MINOCA undergoing immediate coronary angiography, continuous thermodilution assessment and MRR are feasible and safe in the acute setting, and evidence of functional CMD could be observed in one-third of the MINOCA patients.</p

Cardiac Health Assessment Using a Wearable Device Before and After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation:Prospective Study

Background: Due to aging of the population, the prevalence of aortic valve stenosis will increase drastically in upcoming years. Consequently, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) procedures will also expand worldwide. Optimal selection of patients who benefit with improved symptoms and prognoses is key, since TAVI is not without its risks. Currently, we are not able to adequately predict functional outcomes after TAVI. Quality of life measurement tools and traditional functional assessment tests do not always agree and can depend on factors unrelated to heart disease. Activity tracking using wearable devices might provide a more comprehensive assessment. Objective: This study aimed to identify objective parameters (eg, change in heart rate) associated with improvement after TAVI for severe aortic stenosis from a wearable device. Methods: In total, 100 patients undergoing routine TAVI wore a Philips Health Watch device for 1 week before and after the procedure. Watch data were analyzed offline-before TAVI for 97 patients and after TAVI for 75 patients. Results: Parameters such as the total number of steps and activity time did not change, in contrast to improvements in the 6-minute walking test (6MWT) and physical limitation domain of the transformed WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire. Conclusions: These findings, in an older TAVI population, show that watch-based parameters, such as the number of steps, do not change after TAVI, unlike traditional 6MWT and QoL assessments. Basic wearable device parameters might be less appropriate for measuring treatment effects from TAVI.</p

Cost-utility analysis of TAVI compared with surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis at low risk of surgical mortality in the Netherlands

Background: There is growing evidence to support the benefits of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (sSAS) who are at high- or intermediate-risk of surgical mortality. The PARTNER 3 trial showed clinical benefits with SAPIEN 3 TAVI compared with SAVR in patients at low risk of surgical mortality. Whether TAVI is also cost-effective compared with SAVR for low-risk patients in the Dutch healthcare system remains uncertain. This article presents an analysis using PARTNER 3 outcomes and costs data from the Netherlands to inform a cost-utility model and examine cost implications of TAVI over SAVR in a Dutch low-risk population. Methods: A two-stage cost-utility analysis was performed using a published and validated health economic model based on adverse events with both TAVI and SAVR interventions from a published randomized low risk trial dataset, and a Markov model that captured lifetime healthcare costs and patient outcomes post-intervention. The model was adapted using Netherlands-specific cost data to assess the cost-effectiveness of TAVI and SAVR. Uncertainty was addressed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results: TAVI generated 0.89 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at a €4742 increase in costs per patient compared with SAVR over a lifetime time horizon, representing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €5346 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses confirm robust results, with TAVI remaining cost-effective across several sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Based on the model results, compared with SAVR, TAVI with SAPIEN 3 appears cost-effective for the treatment of Dutch patients with sSAS who are at low risk of surgical mortality. Qualitative data suggest broader societal benefits are likely and these findings could be used to optimize appropriate intervention selection for this patient population

Rationale and design of SAVI-AoS:A physiologic study of patients with symptomatic moderate aortic valve stenosis and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction

Background: Moderate aortic valve stenosis occurs twice as often as severe aortic stenosis (AS) and carries a similarly poor prognosis. Current European and American guidelines offer limited insight into moderate AS (MAS) patients with unexplained symptoms. Measuring valve physiology at rest while most patients experience symptoms during exertion might represent a conceptual limitation in the current grading of AS severity. The stress aortic valve index (SAVI) may delineate hemodynamically significant AS among patients with MAS. Objectives: To investigate the diagnostic value of SAVI in symptomatic MAS patients with normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF ≥ 50%): aortic valve area (AVA) > 1 cm2 plus either mean valve gradient (MG) 15–39 mmHg or maximal aortic valve velocity (AOV max) 2.5–3.9 m/s. Short-term objectives include associations with symptom burden, functional capacity, and cardiac biomarkers. Long-term objectives include clinical outcomes. Methods and results: Multicenter, non-blinded, observational cohort. AS severity will be graded invasively (aortic valve pressure measurements with dobutamine stress testing for SAVI) and non-invasively (echocardiography during dobutamine and exercise stress). Computed tomography (CT) of the aortic valve will be scored for calcium, and hemodynamics simulated using computational fluid dynamics. Cardiac biomarkers and functional parameters will be serially monitored. The primary objective is to see how SAVI and conventional measures (MG, AVA and Vmax) correlate with clinical parameters (quality of life survey, 6-minute walk test [6MWT], and biomarkers). Conclusions: The SAVI-AoS study will extensively evaluate patients with unexplained, symptomatic MAS to determine any added value of SAVI versus traditional, resting valve parameters