Performance of Computed Tomographic Angiography– Based Aortic Valve Area for Assessment of Aortic Stenosis

4Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A total of 40% of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) have low-gradient AS, raising uncertainty about AS severity. Aortic valve calcification, measured by computed tomography (CT), is guideline-endorsed to aid in such cases. The performance of different CT-derived aortic valve areas (AVAs) is less well studied. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive adult patients with presumed moderate and severe AS based on echocardiography (AVA measured by continuity equation on echocardiography <1.5 cm2) who underwent cardiac CT were identified retrospectively. AVAs, measured by direct planimetry on CT (AVACT) and by a hybrid approach (AVA measured in a hybrid manner with echo-cardiography and CT [AVAHybrid]), were measured. Sex-specific aortic valve calcification thresholds (≥1200 Agatston units in women and ≥2000 Agatston units in men) were applied to adjudicate severe or nonsevere AS. A total of 215 patients (38.0% women; mean±SD age, 78±8 years) were included: normal flow, 59.5%; and low flow, 40.5%. Among the different thresholds for AVACT and AVAHybrid, diagnostic performance was the best for AVACT <1.2 cm2 (sensitivity, 85%; specificity, 26%; and ac-curacy, 72%), with no significant difference by flow status. The percentage of patients with correctly classified AS severity (correctly classified severe AS+correctly classified moderate AS) was as follows; AVA measured by continuity equation on echocardiography <1.0 cm2, 77%; AVACT <1.2 cm2, 73%; AVACT <1.0 cm2, 58%; AVAHybrid <1.2 cm2, 59%; and AVAHybrid <1.0 cm2, 45%. AVACT cut points of 1.52 cm2 for normal flow and 1.56 cm2 for low flow, provided 95% specificity for excluding severe AS. CONCLUSIONS: CT-derived AVAs have poor discrimination for AS severity. Using an AVACT <1.2-cm2 threshold to define severe AS can produce significant error. Larger AVACT thresholds improve specificity.

References Powered by Scopus

2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

2031Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Guidelines for Performing a Comprehensive Transthoracic Echocardiographic Examination in Adults: Recommendations from the American Society of Echocardiography

1547Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Contemporary presentation and management of valvular heart disease: The EUrobservational research programme valvular heart disease II survey

390Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Moderate Aortic Stenosis—Advanced Imaging, Risk Assessment, and Treatment Strategies

1Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Measuring the aortic valvular area: Key challenges in aortic stenosis assessment

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Aortic Valve Calcium Score: Applications in Clinical Practice and Scientific Research—A Narrative Review

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ash, J., Sandhu, G. S., Arriola-Montenegro, J., Agakishiev, D., Clavel, M. A., Pibarot, P., … Nijjar, P. S. (2023). Performance of Computed Tomographic Angiography– Based Aortic Valve Area for Assessment of Aortic Stenosis. Journal of the American Heart Association, 12(16). https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.123.029973

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 7

58%

Researcher 3

25%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

17%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 8

73%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2

18%

Psychology 1

9%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
News Mentions: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free