Claessen, Guido

Abstract Exercise training improves cardiovascular health and reduces the risk for future cardiovascular events and mortality. However, emerging evidence suggests that Masters athletes may have a higher prevalence of cardiovascular abnormalities, such as atrial arrhythmias, coronary atherosclerosis, aortic dilatation, and myocardial fibrosis, compared to their less active peers. The clinical management of Masters athletes may be challenging as available guidelines for such conditions are generally based on data derived from symptomatic sedentary patients, limiting their applicability to highly trained individuals. Other unique challenges in the clinical assessment of Masters athletes include differences in symptomatic presentations compared to sedentary individuals, potential resistance to the initiation of pharmacologic treatment, and the increasing availability of consumer wearable health data that may provide relevant information on their cardiovascular health status. The purpose of this joint EAPC/ESC and ACC Clinical Consensus Statement is to provide an in-depth update on the current state of knowledge on abnormal cardiovascular findings in Masters athletes. We present an expert-based approach on the diagnostic assessment, management, and prognosis of (i) atrial fibrillation, (ii) bradyarrhythmias, (iii) ventricular arrhythmias, (iv) coronary atherosclerosis, (v) aortic dilatation, (vi) myocardial fibrosis, and (vii) exercise-induced arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy. Clinical challenges, areas of ongoing controversy, and uncertainty and the potential underlying mechanisms are discussed. We also present future perspectives and research directives to further refine current best practice strategies. This includes the need for clinical outcome studies, dedicated randomized controlled trials in athletes, and international registries with diverse populations and longitudinal follow-up to evaluate the natural history of cardiac abnormalities and facilitate development of evidence-based approaches in the clinical management of Masters athletes with cardiovascular abnormalities.

Abstract Aims To study the impact of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) vs. aortic stenosis (AS) lesion severity on left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy, diastolic dysfunction, left atrial (LA) dysfunction, haemodynamics, and exercise capacity. Methods and results Patients (n = 206) with at least moderate AS (aortic valve area ≤0.85 cm/m2) and discordant symptoms underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing with simultaneous echocardiography. The population was stratified according to the probability of underlying HFpEF by the heavy, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary hypertension, elder, filling pressure (H2FPEF) score [0–5 (AS/HFpEF−) vs. 6–9 points (AS/HFpEF+)] and AS severity (Moderate vs. Severe). Mean age was 73 ± 10 years with 40% women. Twenty-eight patients had Severe AS/HFpEF+ (14%), 111 Severe AS/HFpEF− (54%), 13 Moderate AS/HFpEF+ (6%), and 54 Moderate AS/HFpEF− (26%). AS/HFpEF+ vs. AS/HFpEF− patients, irrespective of AS severity, had a lower LV global longitudinal strain, impaired diastolic function, reduced LV compliance, and more pronounced LA dysfunction. The pulmonary arterial pressure–cardiac output slope was significantly higher in AS/HFpEF+ vs. AS/HFpEF− (5.4 ± 3.1 vs. 3.9 ± 2.2 mmHg/L/min, respectively; P = 0.003), mainly driven by impaired cardiac output and chronotropic reserve, with signs of right ventricular pulmonary arterial uncoupling. AS/HFpEF+ vs. AS/HFpEF− was associated with a lower peak aerobic capacity (11.5 ± 3.7 vs. 15.9 ± 5.9 mL/min/kg, respectively; P < 0.0001) but did not differ between Moderate and Severe AS (14.7 ± 5.5 vs. 15.2 ± 5.9 mL/min/kg, respectively; P = 0.6). Conclusion A high H2FPEF score is associated with a reduced exercise capacity and adverse haemodynamics in patients with moderate to severe AS. Both exercise performance and haemodynamics correspond better with intrinsic cardiac dysfunction than AS severity.

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Aortic valve stenosis (AS) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) present with similar cardiac alterations, but their overlap is poorly understood.(1–3). Purpose To study left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy, diastolic dysfunction, left atrial (LA) dysfunction, hemodynamics, and exercise capacity according to HFpEF status versus AS severity. Methods Patients (n=206) with at least moderate AS (aortic valve area ≤0.85 cm2/m2) and discordant symptoms underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing with simultaneous echocardiography. The population was stratified according to the probability of underlying HFpEF by the H2FPEF score [0–5 (AS/HFpEF-) vs. 6–9 points (AS/HFpEF+)] and AS severity (Moderate vs. Severe). Results Mean age was 73±10 years with 40% women. Stratification yielded 41 AS/HFpEF+ (20%) versus 165 AS/HFpEF- (80%) and 139 Severe (67%) versus 67 Moderate (33%) AS patients. AS/HFpEF+ patients had a lower LV global longitudinal strain, impaired diastolic function, reduced LV compliance, and more pronounced LA dysfunction compared to AS/HFpEF- patients. The mean pulmonary arterial pressure-cardiac output (mPAP/CO) slope was significantly higher in AS/HFpEF+ versus AS/HFpEF- (5.4±3.1 vs. 3.9±2.2 mmHg/L/min, respectively; p = 0.003), mainly driven by impaired cardiac output (CO) reserve and chronotropic incompetence, with signs of right ventricular-pulmonary arterial (RV-PA) uncoupling. AS/HFpEF+ versus AS/HFpEF- was associated with a lower peak aerobic capacity (11.5±3.7 vs. 15.9±5.9 mL/min/kg, respectively; p<0.0001), but did not differ between Moderate and Severe AS (14.7±5.5 vs. 15.2±5.9mL/min/kg, respectively; p = 0.6). Conclusions A high H2FPEF score is associated with a reduced exercise capacity and adverse hemodynamics in patients with moderate to severe AS. Both exercise performance and hemodynamics correspond better with intrinsic cardiac dysfunction than AS severity itself.