How myocardial work could be relevant in patients with an aortic valve stenosis?

Aims: Myocardial work (MW) calculation is an attractive method to assess left ventricular (LV) myocardial function. In case of aortic stenosis (AS), assessment of work indices is challenging because it requires an accurate evaluation of LV-pressure curves. We sought to evaluate the performances of two distinct methods and to provide a quantitative comparison with invasive data.

Methods and results: Model-based and template-based methods were defined and applied for the evaluation of LV-pressures on 67 AS-patient. Global Constructive (GCW), Wasted (GWW), Positive (GPW), Negative (GNW) MW and Global Work Efficiency (GWE), and Index (GWI) parameters were calculated using the available software computing the indices using brachial blood-pressure and trans-aortic mean pressure gradient (MPG) for estimating the LV-pressures vs. using a model-based and homemade software. A complete comparison was performed with invasive measurements. Patients were characterized by MPG of 49.8 ± 14.8 mmHg, the global longitudinal strain (GLS) was -15.0 ± 4.04%, GCW was 2107 ± 800 mmHg.% (model-based) and 2483 ± 1068 mmHg.% (template-based). The root mean square error (RMSE) and correlation were calculated for each patient and pressure estimation methods. The mean RMSE are 33.9 mmHg and 40.4 mmHg and the mean correlation coefficients are 0.81 and 0.72 for the model-based and template-based methods, respectively. The two methods present correlation coefficient r2 >0.75 for all the indices.

Conclusion: The two non-invasive methods of LV pressure estimation and work indices computation correlate with invasive measurements. Although the model-based approach requires less information and is associated with slightly better performances, the implementation of template-based method is easier and is appropriate for clinical practice.