Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is the most effective way to treat aortic valve stenosis (AS), and to potentially revert ventricular dysfunction1,2. The outcomes of AVR on the left ventricular function have improved over the last decade, and have been the main focus on the literature3,4. Left ventricular ejection fraction, stroke volume index and valve area, amongst others, are important parameters to understand disease severity and the timing of intervention. However, AVR´s impact on right ventricular (RV) function remains undetermined. This study aims to evaluate the...

Patients In this study,14 patients (9 male, 5 female, mean age 69±7.3years) with severe aortic stenosis and RV ejection fraction (EF) <49% submitted to AVR (11 patients SAVR, 1 patient SAVR + CABG, 2 patients TAVI) were included. Risk factors, patient characteristics and comorbidity are summarized in Table 1 . SAVR - Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement TAVI - Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation CABG - Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Patient preparation Before the exam all patients fulfilled a safety questionnaire to check for any contraindication for...

The mean values at baseline/6 months were: RVEDV= 127.96/118.33ml, RVESV= 79.32/53.75ml, RVSV= 48.50/64.51ml, RVEF= 38.35/53.01% and RVCO= 3.44/4.35 l/min. The results (Mean, SD, Medium, Minimum and Maximum) are presented on tables 2 to 6. The values of the difference betweenbaseline and6 months are also indicated. The differences between baseline and 6 months after surgery were statistically significant for RVCO (p=0.010), RVEF (p< 0.001), RVSV (p=0.009) and RVESV (p <0.001). For RVEDV no significant differences were observed between baseline/6 months (p=0.081).

In this population sample, with severe AS and right ventricular dysfunction, AVR had a significant positive impact on RV remodeling, demonstrated by a considerable increase in RVEF from 38.35% (at baseline) to 53.01% at the follow-up 6 months after AVR.

David Monteiro, BSc Radiology – Vila Nova Gaia/Espinho Hospitalar Centre, Radiology Department, Vila Nova Gaia, Portugal; e-mail [email protected] Carina Cabral, BSc Medical Imaging and Radiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal; email: [email protected] Inês Tavares, BSc Medical Imaging and Radiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal; email: [email protected] Silvia De Francesco, PhD degree in Electrotechnical Engineering, Adjunct Professor at School of Health Sciences (Medical Imaging and Radiotherapy) - University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal; email: [email protected] Nuno Bettencourt, MD, PhD,...

[1] Barreto-Filho JA, Wang Y, Dodson JA, Desai MM, Sugeng L, Geirsson A, Krumholz HM. Trends in aortic valve replacement for elderly patients in the United States, 1999-2011. JAMA. 2013; 310:2078–2085.doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.282437. [2] Pai RG, Varadarajan P, Razzouk A. Survival benefit of aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis with low ejection fraction and low gradient with normal ejection fraction. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008; 86:1781–1789. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2008.08.008. [3] Kulik A, Burwash IG, Kapila V, Mesana TG, Ruel M. Long-term outcomes after valve replacement...