Flow dependence of measures of aortic stenosis severity during exercise

Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle.

OBJECTIVES. This study was designed to investigate the effect of altering transvalvular volume flow rate on indexes of aortic stenosis severity (valve area, valve resistance, percent left ventricular stroke work loss) derived by using Doppler echocardiography. BACKGROUND. Assessment of hemodynamic severity in aortic stenosis has been limited by the absence of an index that is independent of transvalvular flow rate. The traditional measurement of valve area by the Gorlin equation has been shown to vary with alterations in transvalvular flow. Recently, valve resistance and percent stroke work loss have been proposed as indexes that are relatively independent of flow. Although typically derived with invasive measurements, valve resistance and percent stroke work loss (in addition to continuity equation valve area) can be determined noninvasively with Doppler echocardiography. METHODS. We performed 110 symptom-limited exercise studies in 66 asymptomatic patients with valvular aortic stenosis. Continuity equation valve area, valve resistance (the ratio between mean transvalvular pressure gradient and mean flow rate) and the steady component of percent stroke work loss (the ratio between mean transvalvular pressure gradient and left ventricular systolic pressure) were assessed by Doppler echocardiography at rest and immediately after exercise. RESULTS. Mean transvalvular volume flow rate increased 24% (from [mean +/- SD] 319 +/- 80 to 400 +/- 140 ml/s, p < 0.0001); mean pressure gradient increased 36% (from 30 +/- 14 to 41 +/- 18 mm Hg, p < 0.0001); continuity equation aortic valve area increased 14% (from 1.38 +/- 0.50 to 1.58 +/- 0.69 cm2, p < 0.0001); valve resistance increased 13% (from 137 +/- 81 to 155 +/- 97 dynes.s.cm-5, p < 0.0001); and percent stroke work loss increased 17% (from 17.4 +/- 6.9% to 20.3 +/- 8.5%, p < 0.0001). The effects of flow on valve area, valve resistance and percent stroke work loss were independent of the presence of an aortic valve area < or = or > 1.0 cm2 or reduced transvalvular flow rate (rest cardiac output < 4.5 liters/min). CONCLUSIONS. In patients with asymptomatic aortic stenosis, Doppler echocardiographic measures of valve area, valve resistance and percent stroke work loss are flow dependent. Flow dependence is observed with valve area < or = or > 1.0 cm2 and in the presence of both normal and low transvalvular flow states. The potential effects of transvalvular flow should be considered when interpreting Doppler measures of aortic stenosis severity.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				I G Burwash, M Lortie, P Pibarot, R A de Kemp, S Graf, G Mundigler, A Khorsand, C Blais, H Baumgartner, J G Dumesnil, et al. Myocardial blood flow in patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis: differences between true and pseudo-severe aortic stenosis. Results from the multicentre TOPAS (Truly or Pseudo-Severe Aortic Stenosis) study Heart, December 1, 2008; 94(12): 1627 - 1633. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Mascherbauer, C. Fuchs, M. Stoiber, H. Schima, E. Pernicka, G. Maurer, and H. Baumgartner Systemic pressure does not directly affect pressure gradient and valve area estimates in aortic stenosis in vitro Eur. Heart J., August 2, 2008; 29(16): 2049 - 2057. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Leurent, E. Donal, C. de Place, C. Chabanne, R. Gervais, C. Fougerou, A. le Helloco, J.-C. Daubert, P. Mabo, and M. Laurent Argument for a Doppler echocardiography during exercise in assessing asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis Eur J Echocardiogr, May 20, 2008; (2008) jen163v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Lancellotti, D. Karsera, G. Tumminello, F. Lebois, and L. A. Pierard Determinants of an abnormal response to exercise in patients with asymptomatic valvular aortic stenosis Eur J Echocardiogr, May 1, 2008; 9(3): 338 - 343. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Turto, J. Lommi, M. Ventila, and M. Kupari Doppler echocardiography markedly underestimates left ventricular stroke work loss in severe aortic valve stenosis Eur J Echocardiogr, October 1, 2007; 8(5): 341 - 345. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. H Little, K.-L. Chan, and I. G Burwash Impact of blood pressure on the Doppler echocardiographic assessment of severity of aortic stenosis Heart, July 1, 2007; 93(7): 848 - 855. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. M. Otto Valvular Aortic Stenosis: Disease Severity and Timing of Intervention J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 6, 2006; 47(11): 2141 - 2151. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.-P. Quere, J.-L. Monin, F. Levy, H. Petit, S. Baleynaud, C. Chauvel, C. Pop, P. Ohlmann, C. Lelguen, P. Dehant, et al. Influence of Preoperative Left Ventricular Contractile Reserve on Postoperative Ejection Fraction in Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis Circulation, April 11, 2006; 113(14): 1738 - 1744. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Baumgartner Hemodynamic Assessment of Aortic Stenosis: Are There Still Lessons to Learn? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 3, 2006; 47(1): 138 - 140. [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Kadem, R. Rieu, J. G. Dumesnil, L.-G. Durand, and P. Pibarot Flow-Dependent Changes in Doppler-Derived Aortic Valve Effective Orifice Area Are Real and Not Due to Artifact J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 3, 2006; 47(1): 131 - 137. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Kadem, R. Rieu, J. G. Dumesnil, L.-G. Durand, and P. Pibarot Flow-Dependent Changes in Doppler-Derived Aortic Valve Effective Orifice Area Are Real and Not Due to Artifact J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 14, 2005; (2005) j.jacc.2005.05.100v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Baumgartner Hemodynamic Assessment of Aortic Stenosis: Are There Still Lessons to Learn? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 13, 2005; (2005) j.jacc.2005.10.001v1. [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. P. Aurigemma and W. H. Gaasch Low flow-low gradient aortic stenosis: The pathologist weighs in J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 2, 2004; 44(9): 1856 - 1858. [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. A. Carabello Is it ever too late to operate on the patient with valvular heart disease? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., July 21, 2004; 44(2): 376 - 383. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Mascherbauer, H. Schima, R. Rosenhek, M. Czerny, G. Maurer, and H. Baumgartner Value and limitations of aortic valve resistance with particular consideration of low flow-low gradient aortic stenosis: an in vitro study Eur. Heart J., May 1, 2004; 25(9): 787 - 793. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Weerasinghe, M. Yusuf, T. Athanasiou, A. Wood, P. Magee, and R. Uppal Role of transvalvular gradient in outcome from valve replacement for aortic stenosis Ann. Thorac. Surg., April 1, 2004; 77(4): 1266 - 1271. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Bermejo, R. Odreman, J. Feijoo, M. M. Moreno, P. Gomez-Moreno, and M. A. Garcia-Fernandez Clinical efficacy of Doppler-echocardiographic indices of aortic valve stenosis:a comparative test-based analysis of outcome J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 1, 2003; 41(1): 142 - 151. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. A. Carabello Evaluation and Management of Patients With Aortic Stenosis Circulation, April 16, 2002; 105(15): 1746 - 1750. [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. A. Carabello Aortic Stenosis N. Engl. J. Med., February 28, 2002; 346(9): 677 - 682. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. K. Choudhary, S. Talwar, R. Juneja, and A. S. Kumar Fate of mild aortic valve disease after mitral valve intervention J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., September 1, 2001; 122(3): 583 - 586. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Pibarot and J. G. Dumesnil Hemodynamic and clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch in the aortic valve position and its prevention J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 1, 2000; 36(4): 1131 - 1141. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Pibarot, J. G. Dumesnil, J. Jobin, P. Cartier, G. Honos, and L.-G. Durand Hemodynamic and physical performance during maximal exercise in patients with an aortic bioprosthetic valve: Comparison of stentless versus stented bioprostheses J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 1, 1999; 34(5): 1609 - 1617. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F ANTONINI-CANTERIN, P FAGGIANO, D ZANUTTINI, and F RIBICHINI Is aortic valve resistance more clinically meaningful than valve area in aortic stenosis? Heart, July 1, 1999; 82(1): 9 - 10. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S Takeda, H Rimington, and J Chambers The relation between transaortic pressure difference and flow during dobutamine stress echocardiography in patients with aortic stenosis Heart, July 1, 1999; 82(1): 11 - 14. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Arsenault, N. Masani, G. Magni, J. Yao, L. Deras, and N. Pandian Variation of anatomic valve area during ejection in patients with valvular aortic stenosis evaluated by two-dimensional echocardiographic planimetry: comparison with traditional Doppler data J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 1, 1998; 32(7): 1931 - 1937. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T.-M. Lee, S.-F. Su, M.-F. Chen, C.-S. Liau, and Y.-T. Lee Percutaneous Transvenous Mitral Balloon Valvuloplasty Alone in Patients with Combined Aortic and Mitral Stenosis Angiology, May 1, 1997; 48(5): 445 - 450. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. D. Cheitlin, J. S. Alpert, W. F. Armstrong, G. P. Aurigemma, G. A. Beller, F. Z. Bierman, T. W. Davidson, J. L. Davis, P. S. Douglas, L. D. Gillam, et al. ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Clinical Application of Echocardiography : A Report of the American College of Cardiology/ American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Clinical Application of Echocardiography) Developed in Collaboration With the American Society of Echocardiography Circulation, March 18, 1997; 95(6): 1686 - 1744. [Full Text]

				W. K. Laskey, W. G. Kussmaul, and A. Noordergraaf Valvular and Systemic Arterial Hemodynamics in Aortic Valve Stenosis : A Model-Based Approach Circulation, September 15, 1995; 92(6): 1473 - 1478. [Abstract] [Full Text]