Right-parasternal-view (RPV) often provides the best hemodynamic assessment of the aortic-valve-stenosis by echocardiography. However, no detailed study on patients with aortic prosthesis is available. Thus, RPV usefulness is left as an anecdotical notion in this context. We aimed to define feasibility and clinical-impact of RPV before and soon-after percutaneous implantation (TAVI) or surgical (SAVR) aortic-valve-replacement (AVR) for AS. Patients with severe-AS electively referred for AVR between September-2019 and February-2020 were prospectively evaluated. Echocardiographic examinations inclusive of apical and RPV to measure aortic-peak-velocity , gradients and area (AVA) were performed the day before AVR and at hospital discharge and compared by matched-pair-analysis. Forty-seven patients (mean age 79 ± 8 years, 63% female, ejection-fraction 61 ± 6%) referred for SAVR (24 [51%]) or TAVI (23 [49%]) were enrolled. RPV was feasible in 45 patients (96%) before-AVR but in only 32 after-AVR (68%), particularly after SAVR (50%) than TAVI (87% p = 0.005). RPV remained the best acoustic window after TAVI in 75% of cases. Hemodynamic assessment of TAVI, but not SAVR, invariably benefit from RPV versus apical evaluation (aortic-peak-velocity: 2.57 ± 0.39 vs 2.23 ± 0.47 m/sec, p = 0.002; mean gradient: 15 ± 5 vs 12 ± 5 mm Hg, p = 0.01). Five (11%) patients presented severe patient-prosthesis-mismatch, 4 of which were detectable only by RPV. This pilot-experience demonstrates that RPV feasibility is slightly reduced after AVR. RPV can improve the hemodynamic assessment of the prosthetic valve versus apical view, including the detection of patient-prosthesis-mismatch. Furthermore, when RPV is the best acoustic windows in patients with severe AS, it generally remains so after-TAVI.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.