0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Exercise Testing in Asymptomatic Aortic Stenosis

      , ,

      Cardiology

      S. Karger AG

      Asymptomatic aortic stenosis, Exercise testing

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aims: To determine the safety of exercise testing (ET) in patients with moderate or severe asymptomatic aortic stenosis (AAS) and its accuracy to predict the need for surgery and mortality. Methods: 106 consecutive patients with AAS performed a maximal ET. Results: Follow-up [10.7 (4.9–19.4) months (percentile 25–75)] was completed in 102 patients (96.2%), 63.9 years (±15.1), 65 (61.3%) male, peak gradient 82.8 mm Hg (±25.4), mean gradient 50.5 mm Hg (±16.6), valve area 0.67 cm<sup>2</sup> (±0.16); 67 patients (65.7%) had abnormal ET. Among the 35 patients with normal ET, there were no deaths and 10 aortic valve replacements (AVR) (28.5%) were performed. Among the 67 patients with abnormal ET, 37 (55.2%) had events (35 AVR and 2 died) (p <0.0001). There were no complications with ET. Conclusion: ET may be performed safely in patients with AAS. ET gives additional information to an AVR decision.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Mechanisms of coronary microcirculatory dysfunction in patients with aortic stenosis and angiographically normal coronary arteries.

          Development of left ventricular hypertrophy in aortic stenosis (AS) is accompanied by coronary microcirculatory dysfunction, demonstrated by an impaired coronary vasodilator reserve (CVR). However, evidence for regional abnormalities in myocardial blood flow (MBF) and the potential mechanisms is limited. The aims of this study were to quantitatively demonstrate differences in subendocardial and subepicardial microcirculation and to investigate the relative contribution of myocyte hypertrophy, hemodynamic load, severity of AS, and coronary perfusion to impairment in microcirculatory function. Twenty patients with isolated moderate to severe AS were studied using echocardiography to assess severity of AS, cardiovascular magnetic resonance to measure left ventricular mass (LVM), and PET to quantify resting and hyperemic (dipyridamole 0.56 mg/kg) MBF and CVR in both the subendocardium and subepicardium. In the patients with most severe AS (n=15), the subendocardial to subepicardial MBF ratio decreased from 1.14+/-7 at rest to 0.92+/-7 during hyperemia (P<0.005), and subendocardial CVR (1.43+/-3) was lower than subepicardial CVR (1.78+/-35; P=0.01). Resting total LV blood flow was linearly related to LVM, whereas CVR was not. Increase of total LV blood flow during hyperemia (mean value, 89.6+/-6%; range, 17% to 233%) was linearly related to aortic valve area. The decrease in CVR was related to severity of AS, increase in hemodynamic load, and reduction in diastolic perfusion time, particularly in the subendocardium. CVR was more severely impaired in the subendocardium in patients with LVH attributable to severe AS. Severity of impairment was related to aortic valve area, hemodynamic load imposed, and diastolic perfusion rather than to LVM.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Comparison of outcome of asymptomatic to symptomatic patients older than 20 years of age with valvular aortic stenosis.

            A 2-part prospective study was performed to evaluate the clinical outcome of patients with hemodynamically confirmed asymptomatic valvular aortic stenosis (AS). During phase 1, linear regression analysis showed continuous wave Doppler to be highly accurate in predicting catheterization measured peak systolic aortic valve pressure gradients in 101 consecutive patients aged 36 to 83 years (mean 65 +/- 8) with symptomatic AS. During phase 2, 90 additional patients (51 asymptomatic and 39 symptomatic) with Doppler-derived peak systolic aortic valve gradients greater than or equal to 50 mm Hg (range 50 to 132 [mean 68 +/- 19]) were followed for 1 to 45 months. Both groups of patients in phase 2 had similar Doppler gradients and clinical and auscultatory evidence of moderate to severe AS at baseline. Asymptomatic patients were younger (p = 0.01), had higher ejection fractions (p = 0.001) and were less likely to have an electrocardiographic strain pattern (p = 0.01) and left atrial enlargement (p = 0.02). End-diastolic wall thickness, left ventricular cross-sectional myocardial area and estimated left ventricular mass were 18% (p = 0.0001), 20% (p = 0.0008), and 29% (p = 0.002) greater in symptomatic patients. During 17 +/- 9 months of follow-up, 21 asymptomatic patients (41%) became symptomatic. Dyspnea was the most common initial complaint, occurring 2.5 and 4.8 times more often than angina and syncope, respectively. Compared with the 39 symptomatic patients, the 51 asymptomatic patients had a lower cumulative life table incidence of death from any cause (p = 0.002), and from cardiac causes (p = 0.0001) including sudden death (p = 0.013).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Generic, simple risk stratification model for heart valve surgery.

              Heart valve surgery has an associated in-hospital mortality rate of 4% to 8%. This study aims to develop a simple risk model to predict the risk of in-hospital mortality for patients undergoing heart valve surgery to provide information to patients and clinicians and to facilitate institutional comparisons. Data on 32,839 patients were obtained from the Society of Cardiothoracic Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland on patients who underwent heart valve surgery between April 1995 and March 2003. Data from the first 5 years (n=16,679) were used to develop the model; its performance was evaluated on the remaining data (n=16,160). The risk model presented here is based on the combined data. The overall in-hospital mortality was 6.4%. The risk model included, in order of importance (all P<0.01), operative priority, age, renal failure, operation sequence, ejection fraction, concomitant tricuspid valve surgery, type of valve operation, concomitant CABG surgery, body mass index, preoperative arrhythmias, diabetes, gender, and hypertension. The risk model exhibited good predictive ability (Hosmer-Lemeshow test, P=0.78) and discriminated between high- and low-risk patients reasonably well (receiver-operating characteristics curve area, 0.77). This is the first risk model that predicts in-hospital mortality for aortic and/or mitral heart valve patients with or without concomitant CABG. Based on a large national database of heart valve patients, this model has been evaluated successfully on patients who had valve surgery during a subsequent time period. It is simple to use, includes routinely collected variables, and provides a useful tool for patient advice and institutional comparisons.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                CRD
                Cardiology
                10.1159/issn.0008-6312
                Cardiology
                S. Karger AG
                0008-6312
                1421-9751
                2007
                November 2007
                14 November 2006
                : 108
                : 4
                : 258-264
                Affiliations
                Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Department, Favaloro Foundation, Buenos Aires, Argentina
                Article
                96953 Cardiology 2007;108:258–264
                10.1159/000096953
                17114879
                © 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 4, References: 26, Pages: 7
                Categories
                Original Research

                Comments

                Comment on this article