My DDU point form notes on aortic stenosis…
The rest of my DDU notes are here.
causes
calcific stenosis (especially if bicuspid)
~25% over 65 have sclerosis – typically basal ↑ echoes
10-15% of these progress to obstruction, typically by 70-85yo
further ↑ echogenicity, ↓ systolic opening
congenital (bicuspid, unicuspid)
bicuspid
2/3 of severe aortic stenosis in the <70yo population = bicuspid
can be hard to tell if bicuspid when severe
can only tell in systole due to raphe
bigger anterior leaflet (R+L fusion) in ~80%
R+NCC 2nd, L+NCC 3rd
PLAX
diastolic sagging and systolic doming into aorta, eccentric closure line on M-mode
also dilation of sinuses, ascending aorta
PSAX: assess in systole
unicuspid
attaches at 6 o’clock in PSAX
often diagnosed in childhood
rheumatic
commissural fusion, ↑ echogenicity along leaflet edges, doming
mitral stenosis
other causes of LVOTO
subvalvular
dynamic: hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM)
fixed
membrane – suspect in young adults with non-stenotic looking valve, TOE shows the membrane
muscular
supravalvular
→ so check for gradients above and below valve with PWD if ↑ CWD
high PRF PWD useful in rare patients with both
Overall approach
valve anatomy
supra / subvalvular stenosis
Doppler
Vmax
mean gradient
valve area by continuity
LV
dimensions, volumes
LVH
EF, diastolic function
aorta
diameter at sinuses, mid ascending aorta
AR
vena contracta width
quantitation if > mild
MR
mechanism
severity
pulmonary pressures
B mode
2D
↓ opening
planimetry
problem is 3D structure (need to get narrowest part) + calcific shadowing and reverberation
give anatomic valve area – want functional valve area!
3D
planimetry still not accurate
useful for bicuspid vs tricuspid
DOPPLER ASSESSMENT
values
Normal | Mild | Mod | Severe | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Peak velocity (m/s) | <2.9 BSE | 3-3.9 | >4 | |
2.6-2.9 Otto | ||||
Mean gradient (mmHg) | <25 | 25-40 | >40 | |
Valve area (cm2 ) | >2.0 | 1.5-2 | 1-1.5 | <1 |
(Otto: this could be mild in small adults – consider dimensionless index) | (Otto: if Vmax < 4 and LV fn ↓ consider low gradient low output AS) | |||
Velocity ratio (Dimensionless index) | ≥ 0.5 | 0.5-0.25 | ≤0.25 | |
other features from Otto | irregular focal thickening but no obstruction → termed sclerosis | mild LVH | low output, low gradient AS will usually have EF <50% or small LV with normal EF – look at valve calcification ± dobutamine stress echo |
maximum aortic jet velocity
key
strongest predictor of outcome
most reliable and reproducible for serial studies
key for deciding on replacement
CWD
including Pedoff probe
higher signal / noise ratio
smaller footprint → optimal angulation / positioning
quality
patient positioning
settings
high wall filters
gain set
scale set ~1 m/s faster than maximum
parallel (cos 0° = 1) – <15° (remember velocity is squared → ↑ error)
jet often eccentric cf plane of valve, long axis of aorta, and CFD
∴ search from multiple windows
apical with steep left lateral decubitus with apical cutout
suprasternal notch, supine with neck extended
even subcostal, L parasternal sometimes!
good jet
well defined peak velocity
audio is tonal, high frequency
mark at edge of dark spectral envelope
d/dx high velocity jets (timing, shape and diastolic flow curves help Δ)
subaortic obstruction
MR, TR
VSD
PS, branch pulmonary artery stenosis
peripheral vascular stenosis eg. subclavian
mean transaortic pressure gradient
equation
simplified Bernoulli equation
Δ Pmax = 4 Vmax2
corresponds to max on catheter derived
Pmean
corresponds to mean on catheter derived
from average of instantaneous gradient along curve
in native valves, can approximate with
Δ Pmean = 2.4(Vmax)2
neither correlates to peak-to-peak catheter gradient
max > peak to peak since aortic peaks later
probably best to use means if comparing different modalities in same patient
considerations
Vmax and Pmean will change with stroke volume
e.g. AR → ↑ SV → ↑ Vmax (may look severe when moderate)
e.g.2. ↓ LV function or MR → ↓ SV → ↓ Vmax despite severe AS
→ value of valve area
continuity equation valve area
SVLVOT = SVAo
assuming flat velocity profile
SV = CSA x VTI
∴ CSALVOT x VTILVOT = CSAAo x VTIAo
∴ AVA = CSAAo = CSALVOT x VTILVOT / VTIAo
simplification
because shape + timing of LVOT and aortic jet curves similar, can use velocities instead of VTIs:
∴ CSAAo = CSALVOT x VLVOT / VAo
issues
technical issues with recordings
outflow tract diameter
mid-systole from white-black interface of septal endocardium to AMVL
PLAX best (axial resolution)
aortic valve assumed circular
not quite on 3D → don’t use for transcatheter prosthetic valve size
value correlates with body size poorly
Δ in a given patients LVOT Ø over time likely error
errors squared
do several measurements and average
outflow tract velocity
2-3 mm sample volume just proximal to region of acceleration (same position as diameter) → start in jet and move back until
smooth curve
little spectral broadening
closing (but not opening) click
adjust transducer position / angle to get fastest curve with these characteristics
peak at edge of most intensive spectral signal, VTI modal, wall filters low enough to define ejection period
velocity ratio (dimensionless index)
essentially the fraction of the “normal” aortic valve area
ALSO ASSESS
other valvular disease
aortic regurgitation
in 80% of patients with predominant aortic stenosis
often mild, moderate
will ↑ Vmax cf AVA still accurate
mitral regurgitation
common because of MAC with calcific AS
will cause ↓ Vmax (2 routes of ejection) but AVA still accurate
other mitral disease
if low SV will ↓ Vmax
left ventricle
thickness
hypertrophies to ↓ wall stress
can trace endocardium and epicardium at end diastole to get LV mass
function
preserved until late
with valve replacement, LV function may recover
HANDLING CONFLICTING FEATURES
Vmax severe but AVA ≤ moderate → consider
VTILVOT: mod-severe AR, ↑ CO, large patient
CSALVOT: overestimated LVOT diameter
Vmax measurement problem: measured too close to valve (really? this is CW, not PWD)
AVA severe but Vmax ≤ moderate → consider
VTILVOT: mod-severe MR or MS, ↓ CO (↓ EF, small chamber), small patient
CSALVOT: underestimated LVOT diameter
Vmax measurement problem: measured too far from valve (really? this is CW, not PWD)
reproducibility
AVA = CSAAo ≈ CSALVOT x VLVOT / VAo
interobserver and intraobserver variability ~3-4% for velocities, higher for LVOT diameter
overall changes > 0.1 m/s in VLVOT, 0.15 cm2 for AVA, or 0.2 m/s for VAo or LVOT diameter, are greater than measurement variability
VAo may not change as AVA ↓ if VLVOT also ↓
low output low gradient AS
physiological valve area can actually ↓ with transaortic volume flow rate ↓ (valve doesn’t open as much) → can get ↓ continuity valve area when stenosis is not severe
need to consider anatomy, other causes of LV dysfunction, response to medical Rx
dobutamine stress echo useful in selected cases
↑ valve area with ↑ transaortic volume flow rate → flexible leaflets, mild to moderate stenosis
lack of contractile reserve → poor prognosis
OUTCOMES
prognosis depends on symptoms
Cover image: Aortic stenosis rheumatic, gross pathology 20G0014 lores” by CDC/Dr. Edwin P. Ewing, Jr.
Tags: aortic stenosis DDU DDU Notes