Gajjar, Rohan

Abstract Aims Aortic valve calcification (AVC) is prognostic in patients with aortic stenosis (AS). We assessed the AVC prognostic value in non-severe AS patients. Methods and results We conducted a retrospective study of 395 patients with non-severe AS, LVEF ≥ 50%. The Agatston method was used for CT AVC assessment. The log-rank test determined the best AVC cut-offs for survival under medical surveillance: 1185 arbitrary unit (AU) in men and 850 AU in women, lower than the established cut-offs for severe AS (2064 AU in men and 1274 AU in women). Patients were divided into 3 AVC groups based on these cut-offs: low (<1185 AU in men and <850 AU in women), sub-severe (1185–2064 AU in men and 850–1274 AU in women), and severe (>2064 AU in men and >1274 AU in women). Of 395 patients (mean age 73 ± 12 years, 60.5% men, aortic valve area 1.23 ± 0.30 cm2, mean pressure gradient 28 ± 8 mmHg), 218 underwent aortic valve intervention (AVI) and 158 deaths occurred during follow-up, 82 before AVI. Median survival time under medical surveillance was 2.1 (0.7–4.9) years. Compared with the low AVC group, both sub-severe and severe AVC groups had higher risk for all-cause death under medical surveillance after comprehensive adjustment including echocardiographic AS severity and coronary artery calcium score (all P ≤ 0.006); while mortality risk was similar between sub-severe and severe AVC groups (all P ≥ 0.2). This mortality risk pattern persisted in the overall survival analysis after adjustment for AVI. AVI was protective of all-cause death in the sub-severe and severe AVC (all P ≤ 0.01), but not in the low AVC groups. Conclusion Sub-severe AVC is a robust risk stratification parameter in patients with non-severe AS and may inform AVI timing.

Introduction: Criteria for aortic valve intervention (AVI) in severe aortic stenosis (AS) rely on symptoms, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and AS severity. Computed tomography-based aortic valve calcification (CT-AVC) scores associated with severe AS also have prognostic value, but this remains unexplored in patients with non-severe AS. We aimed to assess the prognostic value of AVC in asymptomatic patients with nonsevere AS and preserved LVEF. Methods: We retrospectively identified 395 patients with ≥mild AS but less-than-severe AS by echocardiography, who had CT-AVC assessed within six months. AVCscore was quantified offline by Agatston method (TeraRecon software), and also indexed by LV outflow track area, i.e., AVCdensity. Patients were followed until AVI or death. The primary outcome was all-cause death under medical surveillance. Results: In 395 patients, mean age was 73±12 years, 61% were men, mean aortic valve area 1.2±0.3cm2, mean gradient 28±9 mmHg, peak velocity 3.4±0.5 m/s, LVEF 64±6%. During a follow-up of 2.2[0.74-4.94] years, 220 patients had AVI and 82 patients died. Both AVCscore and AVCdensity were associated with AVI-free survival and the best AVCscore thresholds associated with mortality were 853 in women and 1183 in men by log-rank test (both p<0.001). High AVCscore and high AVCdensity were associated with increased hazard for all-cause death in unadjusted and adjusted analyses (Figure), and after further adjustment for echocardiographic severity (all p ≤0.01). Conclusions: In asymptomatic patients with less-than-severe AS, sex-specific CT-AVC scores differentiate those at higher risk for death versus lower risk. Whether AVI could modify this risk remains to be proven.