Key result
Technical pitfalls frequently drive false discordances, accounting for ~47% of discordant echocardiograms in symptomatic AS.
Why the study?
The combination of small AVA and low mean gradient is often labeled low-flow low-gradient AS, but can stem from underestimation of mean gradient or AVA, prompting investigation into the prevalence and causes of discordant echocardiographic findings.
What are the causes of discordant echocardiographic findings in symptomatic patients with aortic stenosis and normal LV function?
Observational (n=72)
What are the causes of discordant echocardiographic findings in symptomatic patients with aortic stenosis and normal LV function?
In symptomatic AS patients with normal LV function, discordant echocardiographic findings are common and often due to technical underestimation of the mean gradient, highlighting the utility of calcium scoring for accurate diagnosis.
BACKGROUND: While the combination of a small aortic valve area (AVA) and low mean gradient is frequently labeled 'low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis (AS)', there are two potential causes for this finding: underestimation of mean gradient and underestimation of AVA. METHODS: In order to investigate the prevalence and causes of discordant echocardiographic findings in symptomatic patients with AS and normal left ventricular (LV) function, we evaluated 72 symptomatic patients with AS and normal LV function by comparing Doppler, invasive, computed tomography (CT) LV outflow tract (LVOT) area, and calcium score (CaSc). RESULTS: Thirty-six patients had discordant echocardiographic findings (mean gradient < 40 mmHg, AVA ≤ 1 cm²). Of those, 19 had discordant invasive measurements (true discordant [TD]) and 17 concordant (false discordant [FD]): In 12 of the FD the mean gradient was > 30 mmHg; technical pitfalls were found in 10 patients (no reliable right parasternal Doppler in 6). LVOT area by echocardiography or CT could not differentiate between concordants and discordants nor between TD and FD (p = NS). CaSc was similar in concordants and FD (p = 0.3), and it was higher in true concordants than in TD (p = 0.005). CaSc positive predictive value for the correct diagnosis of severe AS was 95% for concordants and 93% for discordants. CONCLUSIONS: Discordant echocardiographic findings are commonly found in patients with symptomatic AS. Underestimation of the true mean gradient due to technical difficulties is an important cause of these discrepant findings. LVOT area by echocardiography or CT cannot differentiate between TD and FD. In the absence of a reliable and compete multi-window Doppler evaluation, patients should undergo CaSc assessment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kuperstein et al. (2021) conducted an observational in severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (n=72). Echocardiography, invasive hemodynamics, and CT calcium scoring was evaluated on Prevalence and causes of discordant echocardiographic findings (mean gradient < 40 mmHg, AVA ≤ 1 cm²). Echocardiographic evaluation of 72 symptomatic AS patients revealed discordant findings in 36 patients, of which 17 were false discordances frequently caused by technical pitfalls.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: