Department of Cardiology, Sakakibara Heart Institute, Tokyo, Japan.
Department of Cardiology, Sakakibara Heart Institute, Tokyo, Japan.
Int J Cardiol. 2023 Sep 1;386:17-23. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2023.05.010. Epub 2023 May 16.
Echocardiography-based transvalvular mean pressure gradient (ECHO-mPG) used to assess the forward valve function and structural valve deterioration could overestimate the true pressure gradient. This study evaluated the discrepancy between invasive and ECHO-mPG after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with respective valve type and size, its impact on a device success criterion, and predictors of a pressure discrepancy.
We analyzed 645 patients registered in a multicenter TAVI registry (balloon-expandable valve [BEV]: 500; self-expandable valve [SEV]: 145). The invasive transvalvular mPG was measured after valve implantation using two Pigtail catheters (CATH-mPG), while the ECHO-mPG was measured within 48 h after TAVI. Pressure recovery (PR) was calculated using the following formula: ECHO-mPG × effective orifice area (EOA)/ascending aortic area (AoA) × (1 - EOA/AoA).
ECHO-mPG was weakly correlated with (r = 0.29, p < 0.0001), and consistently overestimated CATH-mPG in both BEV and SEV, and respective valve sizes. The magnitude of the discrepancy was larger for BEV than SEV (p < 0.001) and smaller valves (p < 0.001). After the correction of PR using the above formula, the pressure discrepancy remained for BEV (p < 0.001) but not SEV (p = 0.10). The proportion of patients with an ECHO-mPG > 20 mmHg decreased from 7.0% to 1.6% after correction (p < 0.0001). Among the baseline and procedural variables, post-procedural ejection fraction, BEV versus SEV, and smaller valves were associated with a larger discrepancy in mPG.
ECHO-mPG could be overestimated after TAVI, especially in patients with a smaller BEV. A higher ejection fraction, BEV, and smaller valves were predictors of a pressure discrepancy between CATH- and ECHO-mPG.
基于超声心动图的跨瓣平均压力梯度(ECHO-mPG)用于评估瓣前功能和结构性瓣膜恶化,可能会高估真实的压力梯度。本研究评估了经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)后,不同瓣膜类型和大小的经皮和 ECHO-mPG 之间的差异,及其对器械成功标准的影响,并预测了压力差异的预测因素。
我们分析了多中心 TAVI 注册中心的 645 名患者(球囊扩张瓣膜 [BEV]:500 例;自扩张瓣膜 [SEV]:145 例)。植入瓣膜后,使用两个猪尾导管(CATH-mPG)测量经皮跨瓣 mPG,TAVI 后 48 小时内测量 ECHO-mPG。使用以下公式计算压力恢复(PR):ECHO-mPG×有效瓣口面积(EOA)/升主动脉面积(AoA)×(1-EOA/AoA)。
ECHO-mPG 与 CATH-mPG 弱相关(r=0.29,p<0.0001),且在 BEV 和 SEV 以及各自的瓣膜尺寸中均高估了 CATH-mPG。BEV 的差异程度大于 SEV(p<0.001)和较小的瓣膜(p<0.001)。使用上述公式校正 PR 后,BEV 的压力差异仍然存在(p<0.001),但 SEV 则没有(p=0.10)。校正后 ECHO-mPG>20mmHg 的患者比例从 7.0%降至 1.6%(p<0.0001)。在基线和手术变量中,术后射血分数、BEV 与 SEV、以及较小的瓣膜与 mPG 差异较大相关。
TAVI 后 ECHO-mPG 可能会被高估,尤其是在较小的 BEV 患者中。较高的射血分数、BEV 和较小的瓣膜是 CATH-mPG 和 ECHO-mPG 之间压力差异的预测因素。