Skip main navigation
Imaging and Nuclear Medicine
Session Title: Computed Tomography (CT): Heart

Abstract 16300: Preoperative Computed Tomography Angiography Reveals Leaflet-specific Contribution to Aortic Stenosis Influenced by Local Coronary Factors

Originally published 2020;142:A16300

    Background: Current computed tomography (CT)-based diagnosis of severe aortic stenosis (AS) using aortic valve calcification (AVC) load does not take into account interleaflet differences in calcification and leaflet dysfunction.

    Objectives: We sought to assess the functional impact of these differences and identify factors that can influence calcification load in a leaflet-specific manner.

    Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the CT angiograms (CTA) of 170 AS patients being considered for valvular intervention and 20 control normal-valve patients. We quantified AVC load, aortic valve leaflet calcification (AVLC) load, and systolic leaflet excursion (LEsys), and used regression analysis to investigate their interrelationships. We further performed computer simulation to examine how interleaflet differences in LEsys affect aortic valve area (AVA). Lastly, we used regression analysis to identify contributors of leaflet-specific calcification.

    Results: We observed significant interleaflet differences in AVLC load in AS patients, with noncoronary cusp (NCC) carrying the most load (342.0 [220.3-603.1] AU), compared to the right coronary cusp (RCC) (278.5 [168.2-492.1] AU; P < 0.001) and the left coronary cusp (LCC) (240.6 [143.1-450.3] AU; P < 0.001). However, LCC, but not NCC, was associated with the least LEsys (43.0 [38.4-49.2] °), compared to both NCC (45.2 [41.2-49.9] °; P = 0.009) and RCC (47.8 [42.1-53.0] °; P < 0.001). Computer simulation of normal valve dynamics revealed that NCC and RCC contributed 10.4 [-1.6-15.7] % more (P = 0.004) and 10.7 [4.9-20.4] % more (P < 0.001) to AVA than LCC. In multiple regression analysis, only NCC and RCC AVLC loads predicted LEsys (b = -0.015, P < 0.001; b = -0.020, P < 0.001), but not LCC AVLC load (b = -0.008; P = 0.065). Both ostial/proximal occlusion and ostial height of right coronary artery predicted RCC AVLC load (b = 71.508, P = 0.007; b = 10.252, P = 0.008).

    Conclusions: NCC and RCC should be given more weight than LCC in the evaluation of AS because of their greater AVC loads, more predictable LEsys-AVLC relationships, and greater contributions to AVA. Ostial/proximal occlusion and large ostial height of RCA should signify risk for disease progression in RCC.


    Author Disclosures: For author disclosure information, please visit the AHA Scientific Sessions 2020 Online Program Planner and search for the abstract title.


    eLetters should relate to an article recently published in the journal and are not a forum for providing unpublished data. Comments are reviewed for appropriate use of tone and language. Comments are not peer-reviewed. Acceptable comments are posted to the journal website only. Comments are not published in an issue and are not indexed in PubMed. Comments should be no longer than 500 words and will only be posted online. References are limited to 10. Authors of the article cited in the comment will be invited to reply, as appropriate.

    Comments and feedback on AHA/ASA Scientific Statements and Guidelines should be directed to the AHA/ASA Manuscript Oversight Committee via its Correspondence page.