Right ventricle to pulmonary artery coupling after transcatheter aortic valve implantation—Determinant factors and prognostic impact

IntroductionRight ventricular (RV) dysfunction and pulmonary hypertension (PH) have been previously associated with unfavorable outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), but little is known about the effect of right ventricle (RV) to pulmonary artery (PA) coupling. Our study aimed to evaluate the determinant factors and the prognostic value of RV-PA coupling in patients undergoing TAVI.MethodsOne hundred sixty consecutive patients with severe AS were prospectively enrolled, between September 2018 and May 2020. They underwent a comprehensive echocardiogram before and 30 days after TAVI, including speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) for myocardial deformation analysis of the left ventricle (LV), left atrium (LA), and RV function. Complete data on myocardial deformation was available in 132 patients (76.6 ± 7.5 years, 52.5% men) who formed the final study population. The ratio of RV free wall longitudinal strain (RV-FWLS) to PA systolic pressure (PASP) was used as an estimate of RV-PA coupling. Patients were analyzed according to baseline RV-FWLS/PASP cut-off point, determined through time-dependent ROC curve analysis, as follows: normal RV-PA coupling group (RV-FWLS/PASP ≥0.63, n = 65) and impaired RV-PA coupling group (RV-FWLS/PASP < 0.63, n = 67).ResultsA significant improvement of RV-PA coupling was observed early after TAVI (0.75 ± 0.3 vs. 0.64 ± 0.3 before TAVI, p < 0.001), mainly due to PASP decrease (p < 0.001). LA global longitudinal strain (LA-GLS) is an independent predictor of RV-PA coupling impairment before and after TAVI (OR = 0.837, p < 0.001, OR = 0.848, p < 0.001, respectively), while RV diameter is an independent predictor of persistent RV-PA coupling impairment after TAVI (OR = 1.174, p = 0.002). Impaired RV-PA coupling was associated with a worse survival rate (66.3% vs. 94.9%, p-value < 0.001) and emerged as an independent predictor of mortality (HR = 5.97, CI = 1.44–24.8, p = 0.014) and of the composite endpoint of death and rehospitalization (HR = 4.14, CI = 1.37–12.5, p = 0.012).ConclusionOur results confirm that relief of aortic valve obstruction has beneficial effects on the baseline RV-PA coupling, and they occur early after TAVI. Despite significant improvement in LV, LA, and RV function after TAVI, RV-PA coupling remains impaired in some patients, it is mainly related to persistent pulmonary hypertension and is associated with adverse outcomes

Epidemiology, pathophysiology and contemporary management of cardiogenic shock - a position statement from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a complex multifactorial clinical syndrome with extremely high mortality, developing as a continuum, and progressing from the initial insult (underlying cause) to the subsequent occurrence of organ failure and death. There is a large spectrum of CS presentations resulting from the interaction between an acute cardiac insult and a patient's underlying cardiac and overall medical condition. Phenotyping patients with CS may have clinical impact on management because classification would support initiation of appropriate therapies. CS management should consider appropriate organization of the health care services, and therapies must be given to the appropriately selected patients, in a timely manner, whilst avoiding iatrogenic harm. Although several consensus-driven algorithms have been proposed, CS management remains challenging and substantial investments in research and development have not yielded proof of efficacy and safety for most of the therapies tested, and outcome in this condition remains poor. Future studies should consider the identification of the new pathophysiological targets, and high-quality translational research should facilitate incorporation of more targeted interventions in clinical research protocols, aimed to improve individual patient outcomes. Designing outcome clinical trials in CS remains particularly challenging in this critical and very costly scenario in cardiology, but information from these trials is imperiously needed to better inform the guidelines and clinical practice. The goal of this review is to summarize the current knowledge concerning the definition, epidemiology, underlying causes, pathophysiology and management of CS based on important lessons from clinical trials and registries, with a focus on improving in-hospital management.Peer reviewe

Acute heart failure and valvular heart disease: a scientific statement of the Heart Failure Association (HFA), the Association for Acute Cardi-Vascular Care (ACVC) and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) of the ESC

Acute heart failure (AHF) represents a broad spectrum of disease states, resulting from the interaction between an acute precipitant and a patient's underlying cardiac substrate and comorbidities. Valvular heart disease (VHD) is frequently associated with AHF. AHF may result from several precipitants that add an acute haemodynamic stress superimposed on a chronic valvular lesion or may occur as a consequence of a new significant valvular lesion. Regardless of the mechanism, clinical presentation may vary from acute decompensated heart failure to cardiogenic shock. Assessing the severity of VHD as well as the correlation between VHD severity and symptoms may be difficult in patients with AHF because of the rapid variation in loading conditions, concomitant destabilization of the associated comorbidities and the presence of combined valvular lesions. Evidence-based interventions targeting VHD in settings of AHF have yet to be identified, as patients with severe VHD are often excluded from randomized trials in AHF, so results from these trials do not generalize to those with VHD. Furthermore, there are not rigorously conducted randomized controlled trials in the setting of VHD and AHF, most of the data coming from observational studies. Thus, distinct to chronic settings, current guidelines are very elusive when patients with severe VHD present with AHF, and a clear-cut strategy could not be yet defined. Given the paucity of evidence in this subset of AHF patients, the aim of this scientific statement is to describe the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and overall treatment approach for patients with VHD who present with AHF.[GRAPHICS

Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline