MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406926802 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jeae333.438

Dobutamine echocardiography impact on managing low-gradient aortic stenosis and solving the issue with inconclusive studies

2025· article· en· W4406926802 on OpenAlexaff
Anastasia Vamvakidou, Mohamed‐Salah Annabi, A. Almeida, Eleonora Guzzetti, Ian G. Burwash, Jutta Bergler‐Klein, Julia Mascherbauer, H. Baumgartner, João L. Cavalcante, Wojciech Kosmala, Marie‐Annick Clavel, Frank A. Flachskampf, Philippe Pibarot, Roxy Senior

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiologyStenosisInternal medicineDobutamineMedicineRadiologyHemodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Guidelines advocate the use of dobutamine echocardiography (DSE) in low-gradient aortic stenosis (LGAS: AVA<1cm² with AVMG<40mmHg) with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF <50%) for determining AS severity and deciding on subsequent patient management. However, a significant proportion of patients have inconclusive DSE (indeterminate AS). Purpose We aimed to assess the impact of DSE on the management of patients with LGAS and reduced LVEF as well as the application of transaortic flow-based criteria for severe AS to improve the diagnostic yield of DSE. Finally, we aimed to review the impact of aortic valve intervention in those with indeterminate AS. Methods Accordingly, a retrospective analysis of 287 patients with LGAS and reduced LVEF (<50%) who underwent DSE was performed. We used the conventional criteria for classification of AS severity following DSE: severe AS when AVA <1cm² with AVMG ≥40mmHg, moderate AS when AVA ≥1cm², and indeterminate AS when AVA <1cm² and AVMG <40mmHg during stress. Furthermore, we assessed the proposed new criteria for AS classification: AVA <1cm² at normalised FR ≥210ml/s and projected AVA <1cm² at FR of 250ml/s. We also assessed the impact of afterload on the different AS groups by means of valvular resistance (valve disease related afterload) and arterial impedance (vascular disease related afterload). Results Following DSE 84 (29%) patients had severe AS, 81 (28%) moderate AS, and 122 (43%) indeterminate AS. Over the median follow-up of 12.0 (IQR= 5-33) months more patients with severe AS (73%) underwent aortic valve intervention compared with moderate (40%) and indeterminate AS (44%) (p< 0.001). In terms of afterload, the valvular resistance was significantly higher in patients with severe AS compared to indeterminate AS (p<0.001), but arterial impedance was higher in indeterminate AS amongst all 3 groups (p=0.02). Use of the proposed combined criteria for severe AS (AVA <1cm² at FR ≥210ml/s or projected AVA) in the indeterminate AS group improved the proportion of diagnostic tests from 57% to 90%, increased detection of severe AS from 29% to 61%, and reduced indeterminate AS to 9%. Aortic valve intervention was beneficial in the reclassified severe AS patients (HR 0.50, 95%CI 0.27-0.92, p=0.03) (Fig.1A), but not in the remaining indeterminate AS patients (HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.22-2.75, p=0.69) (Fig.1B). The benefit of aortic valve intervention was larger in the conventionally diagnosed severe AS patients compared to the reclassified severe AS patients (HR 2.88, 95%CI 1.34-6.21, p=0.007) (Fig.1C). Conclusions Clinicians managed LGAS patients according to DSE-determined AS severity. Application of the proposed combined criteria for severe AS reduced the number of non-diagnostic DSE and increased the detection of severe AS. In the reclassified severe AS patients aortic valve intervention can be beneficial, but not in those who remained indeterminate AS. Figure 1

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular ImagingSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207