Cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of the aortic valve stenosis: an in vivo and ex vivo study

BackgroundAortic valve area (AVA) estimation in patients with aortic stenosis may be obtained using several methods. This study was undertaken to verify the cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) planimetry of aortic stenosis by comparing the findings with invasive catheterization, transthoracic (TTE) as well as tranesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and anatomic CMR examination of autopsy specimens.MethodsOur study was performed in eight patients with aortic valve stenosis. Aortic stenosis was determined by TTE and TEE as well as catheterization and CMR. Especially, after aortic valve replacement, the explanted aortic valves were examined again with CMR ex vivo model.ResultsThe mean AVA determined in vivo by CMR was 0.75 ± 0.09 cm2 and ex vivo by CMR was 0.65 ± 0.09 cm2 and was closely correlated (r = 0.91, p < 0.001). The mean absolute difference between AVA derived by CMR ex vivo and in vivo was −0.10 ± 0.04 cm2. The mean AVA using TTE was 0.69 ± 0.07 with a significant correlation between CMR ex vivo (r = 0.85, p < 0.007) and CMR in vivo (r = 0.86, p < 0.008). CMR ex vivo and in vivo had no significant correlation with AVA using Gorlin formula by invasive catheterization or using planimetry by TEE.ConclusionIn this small study using an ex vivo aortic valve stenosis model, the aortic valve area can be reliably planimetered by CMR in vivo and ex vivo with a well correlation between geometric AVA by CMR and the effective AVA calculated by TTE.

[1]  F. Neumann,et al.  Inconsistencies of echocardiographic criteria for the grading of aortic valve stenosis. , 2008, European heart journal.

[2]  Damien Garcia,et al.  Discrepancies between catheter and Doppler estimates of valve effective orifice area can be predicted from the pressure recovery phenomenon: practical implications with regard to quantification of aortic stenosis severity. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  H. Baumgartner.  Aortic stenosis: medical and surgical management , 2005, Heart.

[4]  W. Nitz,et al.  Planimetry of Aortic Valve Area in Aortic Stenosis by Magnetic Resonance Imaging , 2005, Investigative radiology.

[5]  S. Feuerbach,et al.  Electrocardiographic diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy in aortic valve disease: evaluation of ECG criteria by cardiovascular magnetic resonance , 2009, Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance.

[6]  P. Pibarot,et al.  Paradoxical Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Severe Aortic Stenosis Despite Preserved Ejection Fraction Is Associated With Higher Afterload and Reduced Survival , 2007, Circulation.

[7]  S. Achenbach,et al.  Comparison of dual-source computed tomography for the quantification of the aortic valve area in patients with aortic stenosis versus transthoracic echocardiography and invasive hemodynamic assessment. , 2009, The American journal of cardiology.

[8]  J. Chambers,et al.  Echocardiographic assessment of valve stenosis: EAE/ASE recommendations for clinical practice. , 2009, Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography : official publication of the American Society of Echocardiography.

[9]  J. Chambers,et al.  Outcome of Patients With Low-Gradient “Severe” Aortic Stenosis and Preserved Ejection Fraction , 2011, Circulation.

[10]  O. Alfieri,et al.  Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012). , 2012, European heart journal.

[11]  F. von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff,et al.  Feasibility of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance to Assess the Orifice Area of Aortic Bioprostheses , 2009, Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging.

[12]  A. Selzer.  Changing aspects of the natural history of valvular aortic stenosis. , 1987, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  O. Alfieri,et al.  Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease. , 2007, European heart journal.

[14]  C. Tribouilloy,et al.  Comparative value of Doppler echocardiography and cardiac catheterization in the decision to operate on patients with aortic stenosis. , 1998, International journal of cardiology.

[15]  O. Alfieri,et al.  [Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012). The Joint Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)]. , 2013, Giornale italiano di cardiologia.

[16]  R GORLIN,et al.  Hydraulic formula for calculation of the area of the stenotic mitral valve, other cardiac valves, and central circulatory shunts. I. , 1951, American heart journal.

[17]  Philippe Pibarot,et al.  Usefulness of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of valve opening and closing kinetics in aortic stenosis. , 2013, European heart journal cardiovascular Imaging.

[18]  Sung Min Ko,et al.  Evaluation of the aortic and mitral valves with cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging , 2012, The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.

[19]  C. Thomsen,et al.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Valvular Heart Disease , 1999, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[20]  U. Sechtem,et al.  Evaluation of aortic stenosis by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging: comparison with established routine clinical techniques , 2004, Heart.

[21]  C. Hamm,et al.  Magnetic resonance to assess the aortic valve area in aortic stenosis: how does it compare to current diagnostic standards? , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[22]  S. Feuerbach,et al.  Variable phenotypes of bicuspid aortic valve disease: classification by cardiovascular magnetic resonance , 2010, Heart.

[23]  J. Schulz-Menger,et al.  Quantification of valvular aortic stenosis by magnetic resonance imaging. , 2002, American heart journal.

[24]  S. Ko,et al.  Morphological assessment of the aortic valve using coronary computed tomography angiography, cardiovascular magnetic resonance, and transthoracic echocardiography: comparison with intraoperative findings , 2012, The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.

[25]  Philippe Pibarot,et al.  Paradoxical Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Severe Aortic Stenosis Despite Preserved Ejection Fraction Is Associated With Higher Afterload and Reduced Survival , 2007 .

[26]  G. Feuchtner,et al.  Sixty-four slice CT evaluation of aortic stenosis using planimetry of the aortic valve area. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[27]  G. Filippatos,et al.  [Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease]. , 2013, Revista espanola de cardiologia.

[28]  Helmut Baumgartner,et al.  Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease The Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology , 2007 .