Published in

American Heart Association, Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging, 7(15), 2022

DOI: 10.1161/circimaging.122.014115

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Reverse Remodeling Following Valve Replacement in Coexisting Aortic Stenosis and Transthyretin Cardiac Amyloidosis

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Background: Dual pathology of severe aortic stenosis (AS) and transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (ATTR) is increasingly recognized. Evolution of symptoms, biomarkers, and myocardial mechanics in AS-ATTR following valve replacement is unknown. We aimed to characterize reverse remodeling in AS-ATTR and compared with lone AS. Methods: Consecutive patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) underwent ATTR screening by blinded 99mTc-DPD bone scintigraphy (Perugini Grade-0 negative, 1–3 increasingly positive) before intervention. ATTR was diagnosed by DPD and absence of monoclonal protein. Reverse remodeling was assessed by comprehensive evaluation before TAVR and at 1 year. Results: One hundred twenty patients (81.8±6.3 years, 51.7% male, 95 lone AS, 25 AS-ATTR) with complete follow-up were studied. At 12 months (interquartile range, 7–17) after TAVR, both groups experienced significant symptomatic improvement by New York Heart Association functional class (both P <0.001). Yet, AS-ATTR remained more symptomatic (New York Heart Association ≥III: 36.0% versus 13.8; P =0.01) with higher residual NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide) levels ( P <0.001). Remodeling by echocardiography showed left ventricular mass regression only for lone AS ( P =0.002) but not AS-ATTR ( P =0.5). Global longitudinal strains improved similarly in both groups. Conversely, improvement of regional longitudinal strain showed a base-to-apex gradient in AS-ATTR, whereas all but apical segments improved in lone AS. This led to the development of an apical sparing pattern in AS-ATTR only after TAVR. Conclusions: Patterns of reverse remodeling differ from lone AS to AS-ATTR, with both groups experiencing symptomatic improvement by TAVR. After AS treatment, AS-ATTR transfers into a lone ATTR cardiomyopathy phenotype.