Abstract 14928: Coronary Artery Disease Impacts Cardiac Remodeling in Patients Treated for Severe Aortic Stenosis in the PARTNER Trials
Melissa A Daubert, Ke Xu, Rebecca T Hahn, Philippe Pibarot, Jonathon Leipsic, Marie-Annick A Clavel, Sammy Elmariah, Neil J Weissman, Federico M Asch, Omar Khalique, Martin B Leon, Paul C Cremer, Brian R Lindman, Maria Alu, Pamela S Douglas- Physiology (medical)
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Introduction: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is common in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS), but the impact on cardiac remodeling and outcomes after AS treatment is unknown.
Hypothesis: We hypothesize that greater CAD burden will be associated with less beneficial remodeling and increased adverse events.
Methods: Patients with severe AS in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) 1, 2 or 3 trials, with baseline and 1 year echoes, were categorized as: 1. Obstructive CAD (coronary stenosis ≥50% on invasive angiography, prior myocardial infarction (MI) or previous revascularization); or 2. Non-obstructive or no CAD (all stenosis <50% and no prior MI or revasc). Clinical and imaging characteristics were compared and changes in cardiac structure and function were assessed at 1 year. Associations between CAD, cardiac remodeling and cardiovascular (CV) events at 2 years were examined.
Results: Among 5552 patients with severe AS, 1598 (28.8%) had non-obstructive or no CAD and were more likely to be female (67.1%), have fewer CAD risk factors, and receive SAVR (28% vs. 19%) compared to those with obstructive CAD (all p<0.0001). Despite lower LV mass index (LVMi), patients with non-obstructive or no CAD had higher aortic valve velocities, gradients, ejection fraction (EF) and stroke volume index compared to those with obstructive CAD. After 1 year, the decrease in LVMi was similar between groups (p=0.91), but patients with obstructive CAD were more likely to increase EF by ≥5% (p=0.006), reduce LV dimensions (p=0.04), or decrease mitral regurgitation (p=0.01). After adjustment for baseline factors and AS treatment, CV death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization was higher among patients with obstructive CAD (HR 1.16, 95% CI: 1.03-1.30, p=0.01). When LV remodeling at 1 year was also adjusted for, the point estimate was similar but there was no significant difference in the landmarked rate of CV death or HF hospitalization between year 1 and 2 (HR 1.22, 95% CI: 0.95-1.56, p=0.12).
Conclusions: Nearly a third of patients with severe AS did not have obstructive CAD and had a better prognosis after treatment for AS. However, patients with obstructive CAD and LV remodeling were not at greater risk for CV events compared to those with non-obstructive or no CAD.