Aortic Regurgitation After TAVR Poses Threat

MIAMI BEACH – Researchers have developed a way to quickly and objectively assess the risk for aortic valve regurgitation based on the measurement of aortic blood pressures immediately after transcatheter valvevale replacement (TAVR). This new measure, the "aortic regurgitation index," showed significant correlation with periprocedural aortic regurgitation as well as with patients’ 1-year survival following their procedure, Dr. Eberhard Grube said at the ISET 2012 meeting.

Until now, "there has been no way to quantify aortic regurgitation; it’s subjective," said Dr. Grube, professor and chief of cardiology and angiology at the Helios Heart Centre in Siegburg, Germany. The aortic regurgitation index (ARI) allows physicians "to quantify aortic regurgitation periprocedurally by objectively looking at the patient’s hemodynamics, regardless of the subjective evaluation of aortic insufficiency by angiography or by echo," he said. "We can see the ARI and know what we need to do for post-deployment treatment."

Dr. Grube and his associates set the ARI as equal to the patient’s diastolic aortic pressure minus the left ventricular end diastolic pressure, all divided by the aortic systolic pressure, andthen multiplied by 100.

For example, a patient with mild periprocedural aortic regurgitation might have an aortic diastolic pressure of 60 mm Hg, a left ventricular end diastolic pressure of 15 mm Hg, and an aortic systolic pressure of 150 mm Hg, which would produce an ARI of 30, showing that the patient had a low risk for dying during the subsequent year. In contrast, a patient with moderate or severe periprocedural aortic regurgitation could have an aortic diastolic pressure of 40 mm Hg, a left ventricular end diastolic pressure of 20 mm Hg, and an aortic systolic pressure of 120 mm Hg, which would produce an ARI of 16.7, flagging a higher mortality risk in the following year.

His group assessed the prognostic ability of the ARI in a series of 146 patients who underwent TAVR. The group included 124 patients with no or mild aortic regurgitation following TAVR and 22 who showed moderate or severe regurgitation. During 1-year follow-up, the 96 patients with a periprocedural ARI of 25 or greater had an 83% survival rate; the 50 patients with a periprocedural ARI of less than 25 had a survival rate of 54%, a statistically significant difference. The analysis also showed a significant correlation between the ARI and the severity of aortic regurgitation. Among patients with no discerniable regurgitation, the average ARI was about 30, in those with mild regurgitation the average ARI was about 25, in patients with moderate regurgitation the average was about 18, and in patients with severe regurgitation the ARI averaged about 10.

One recently identified key to limiting aortic regurgitation following TAVR is proper valve sizing relative to the patient’s aortic annulus. "Appropriate valve sizing is likely the most important factor that will influence both the degree of perivalvular regurgitation and pacemaker need after TAVR," said Dr. Jeffrey J. Popma in a separate talk at the meeting.

Until recently, many operators used transthoracic echocardiography for annulus sizing, but recently published evidence showed that imaging by CT or by MRI provides superior information, said Dr. Popma, director of interventional cardiology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. He cited a British report published last November that compared transthoracic echo, CT, and MRI in 202 patients who underwent TAVR, which found both CT and MRI superior to echo for annulus measurement prior to TAVR (J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2011;58:2165-73).

Dr. Grube and Dr. Popma disclosed financial relationships with several medical device manufacturers including Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Cordis.

MIAMI BEACH – Researchers have developed a way to quickly and objectively assess the risk for aortic valve regurgitation based on the measurement of aortic blood pressures immediately after transcatheter valvevale replacement (TAVR). This new measure, the "aortic regurgitation index," showed significant correlation with periprocedural aortic regurgitation as well as with patients’ 1-year survival following their procedure, Dr. Eberhard Grube said at the ISET 2012 meeting.

Until now, "there has been no way to quantify aortic regurgitation; it’s subjective," said Dr. Grube, professor and chief of cardiology and angiology at the Helios Heart Centre in Siegburg, Germany. The aortic regurgitation index (ARI) allows physicians "to quantify aortic regurgitation periprocedurally by objectively looking at the patient’s hemodynamics, regardless of the subjective evaluation of aortic insufficiency by angiography or by echo," he said. "We can see the ARI and know what we need to do for post-deployment treatment."

Dr. Grube and his associates set the ARI as equal to the patient’s diastolic aortic pressure minus the left ventricular end diastolic pressure, all divided by the aortic systolic pressure, andthen multiplied by 100.

For example, a patient with mild periprocedural aortic regurgitation might have an aortic diastolic pressure of 60 mm Hg, a left ventricular end diastolic pressure of 15 mm Hg, and an aortic systolic pressure of 150 mm Hg, which would produce an ARI of 30, showing that the patient had a low risk for dying during the subsequent year. In contrast, a patient with moderate or severe periprocedural aortic regurgitation could have an aortic diastolic pressure of 40 mm Hg, a left ventricular end diastolic pressure of 20 mm Hg, and an aortic systolic pressure of 120 mm Hg, which would produce an ARI of 16.7, flagging a higher mortality risk in the following year.

His group assessed the prognostic ability of the ARI in a series of 146 patients who underwent TAVR. The group included 124 patients with no or mild aortic regurgitation following TAVR and 22 who showed moderate or severe regurgitation. During 1-year follow-up, the 96 patients with a periprocedural ARI of 25 or greater had an 83% survival rate; the 50 patients with a periprocedural ARI of less than 25 had a survival rate of 54%, a statistically significant difference. The analysis also showed a significant correlation between the ARI and the severity of aortic regurgitation. Among patients with no discerniable regurgitation, the average ARI was about 30, in those with mild regurgitation the average ARI was about 25, in patients with moderate regurgitation the average was about 18, and in patients with severe regurgitation the ARI averaged about 10.

One recently identified key to limiting aortic regurgitation following TAVR is proper valve sizing relative to the patient’s aortic annulus. "Appropriate valve sizing is likely the most important factor that will influence both the degree of perivalvular regurgitation and pacemaker need after TAVR," said Dr. Jeffrey J. Popma in a separate talk at the meeting.

Until recently, many operators used transthoracic echocardiography for annulus sizing, but recently published evidence showed that imaging by CT or by MRI provides superior information, said Dr. Popma, director of interventional cardiology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. He cited a British report published last November that compared transthoracic echo, CT, and MRI in 202 patients who underwent TAVR, which found both CT and MRI superior to echo for annulus measurement prior to TAVR (J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2011;58:2165-73).

Dr. Grube and Dr. Popma disclosed financial relationships with several medical device manufacturers including Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Cordis.

MIAMI BEACH – Researchers have developed a way to quickly and objectively assess the risk for aortic valve regurgitation based on the measurement of aortic blood pressures immediately after transcatheter valvevale replacement (TAVR). This new measure, the "aortic regurgitation index," showed significant correlation with periprocedural aortic regurgitation as well as with patients’ 1-year survival following their procedure, Dr. Eberhard Grube said at the ISET 2012 meeting.

Until now, "there has been no way to quantify aortic regurgitation; it’s subjective," said Dr. Grube, professor and chief of cardiology and angiology at the Helios Heart Centre in Siegburg, Germany. The aortic regurgitation index (ARI) allows physicians "to quantify aortic regurgitation periprocedurally by objectively looking at the patient’s hemodynamics, regardless of the subjective evaluation of aortic insufficiency by angiography or by echo," he said. "We can see the ARI and know what we need to do for post-deployment treatment."

Dr. Grube and his associates set the ARI as equal to the patient’s diastolic aortic pressure minus the left ventricular end diastolic pressure, all divided by the aortic systolic pressure, andthen multiplied by 100.

For example, a patient with mild periprocedural aortic regurgitation might have an aortic diastolic pressure of 60 mm Hg, a left ventricular end diastolic pressure of 15 mm Hg, and an aortic systolic pressure of 150 mm Hg, which would produce an ARI of 30, showing that the patient had a low risk for dying during the subsequent year. In contrast, a patient with moderate or severe periprocedural aortic regurgitation could have an aortic diastolic pressure of 40 mm Hg, a left ventricular end diastolic pressure of 20 mm Hg, and an aortic systolic pressure of 120 mm Hg, which would produce an ARI of 16.7, flagging a higher mortality risk in the following year.

His group assessed the prognostic ability of the ARI in a series of 146 patients who underwent TAVR. The group included 124 patients with no or mild aortic regurgitation following TAVR and 22 who showed moderate or severe regurgitation. During 1-year follow-up, the 96 patients with a periprocedural ARI of 25 or greater had an 83% survival rate; the 50 patients with a periprocedural ARI of less than 25 had a survival rate of 54%, a statistically significant difference. The analysis also showed a significant correlation between the ARI and the severity of aortic regurgitation. Among patients with no discerniable regurgitation, the average ARI was about 30, in those with mild regurgitation the average ARI was about 25, in patients with moderate regurgitation the average was about 18, and in patients with severe regurgitation the ARI averaged about 10.

One recently identified key to limiting aortic regurgitation following TAVR is proper valve sizing relative to the patient’s aortic annulus. "Appropriate valve sizing is likely the most important factor that will influence both the degree of perivalvular regurgitation and pacemaker need after TAVR," said Dr. Jeffrey J. Popma in a separate talk at the meeting.

Until recently, many operators used transthoracic echocardiography for annulus sizing, but recently published evidence showed that imaging by CT or by MRI provides superior information, said Dr. Popma, director of interventional cardiology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. He cited a British report published last November that compared transthoracic echo, CT, and MRI in 202 patients who underwent TAVR, which found both CT and MRI superior to echo for annulus measurement prior to TAVR (J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2011;58:2165-73).

Dr. Grube and Dr. Popma disclosed financial relationships with several medical device manufacturers including Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Cordis.