Pseudo-discordance mimicking low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis in transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis.

Abstract

BACKGROUND\nWhile the combination of a small aortic valve area (AVA) and low mean gradient is frequently labeled low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis (AS) , there are two potential causes for this finding: underestimation of mean gradient and underestimation of AVA.\n\n\nMETHODS\nIn order to investigate the prevalence and causes of discordant echocardiographic findings in symptomatic patients with AS and normal left ventricular (LV) function, we evaluated 72 symptomatic patients with AS and normal LV function by comparing Doppler, invasive, computed tomography (CT) LV outflow tract (LVOT) area, and calcium score (CaSc).\n\n\nRESULTS\nThirty-six patients had discordant echocardiographic findings (mean gradient < 40 mmHg, AV area ≤ 1 cm²). Of those, 19 had discordant invasive measurements (true discordant [TD]) and 17 concordant (false discordant [FD]): In 12 of the FD the mean gradient was > 30 mmHg; technical pitfalls were found in 10 patients (no reliable right parasternal Doppler in 6). LVOT area by echocardiography or CT could not differentiate between concordants and discordants nor between TD and FD (p = NS). CaSc was similar in concordants and FD (p = 0.3), and it was higher in true concordants than in TD (p = 0.005). CaSc positive predictive value for the correct diagnosis of severe AS was 95% for concordants and 93% for discordants.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nDiscordant echocardiographic findings are commonly found in patients with symptomatic AS. Underestimation of the true mean gradient due to technical difficulties is an important cause of these discrepant findings. LVOT area by echocardiography or CT cannot differentiate between TD and FD. In the absence of a reliable and compete multi-window Doppler evaluation, patients should undergo CaSc assessment.