Do males and females with aortic stenosis exhibit differences in left ventricular function and structure?
In patients with aortic stenosis, males exhibit more depressed systolic function, increased myocardial stiffness, and abnormal collagen architecture compared to females with similar disease severity.
To evaluate gender-related differences in left ventricular (LV) structure and function in aortic stenosis, LV biplane cineangiography, micromanometry and endomyocardial biopsies were carried out in 56 patients with aortic stenosis and normal coronary arteries. Patients were divided into males (M: n = 35), and females (F: n = 21). Sixteen normal subjects 8 M, 8 F) served as haemodynamic controls. Control biopsy data were obtained from six pre-transplantation donor hearts (3 M and 3 F). LV systolic function was evaluated by ejection fraction and its relationship to mean systolic circumferential wall stress, diastolic function by the time constant of LV pressure decay, peak filling rates and passive myocardial stiffness constant. Biopsy samples were evaluated for interstitial fibrosis, muscle fibre diameter and volume fraction of myofibrils. In a subset of 27 consecutive patients, biopsy samples were evaluated with a morphometric-morphological method, for total collagen volume fraction, endocardial fibrosis and the extension and thickness of orthogonal collagen fibres (cross-hatching). In patients with aortic stenosis, aortic valve area, aortic valve resistance and mean aortic pressure gradient were comparable in males and females, whereas end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes were larger in males than females. Ejection fraction was lower (56%) in males than females (64%) (P 1.5 grade) was present in 11 males and four females with aortic stenosis (P < 0.01). An abnormal collagen architecture was present in 13/14 males and 5/13 females (P < 0.002). In aortic stenosis, males have a depressed systolic function and abnormal passive elastic properties when compared to females with valve lesions of similar severity. Changes in collagen architecture may account, at least in part, for these differences.
Villari et al. (Sun,) studied this question.