Aortic valve calcification (AVC) in aortic stenosis patients has diagnostic and prognostic implications. Little is known about the interchangeability of AVC obtained from different multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) software solutions. Contrast-enhanced MDCT data sets of 50 randomly selected aortic stenosis patients were analysed using three different software vendors (3Mensio, CVI42, Syngo.Via). A subset of 10 patients were analysed twice for the estimation of intra-observer variability. Intra- and inter-observer variability were determined using the ICC reliability method, Bland-Altman analysis and coefficients of variation. No differences were revealed between the software solutions in the AVC calculations (3Mensio 941 ± 623, Syngo.Via 948 mm3 ± 655, CVI42 941 ± 637; p = 0.455). The best inter-vendor agreement was found between the CVI42 and the Syngo.Via (ICC 0.997 (CI 0.995–0.998)), followed by the 3Mensio and the CVI42 (ICC 0.996 (CI 0.922–0.998)), and the 3Mensio and the Syngo.Via (ICC 0.992 (CI 0.986–0.995)). There was excellent intra- (3Mensio: ICC 0.999 (0.995–1.000); CVI42: ICC 1.000 (0.999–1.000); Syngo.Via: ICC 0.998 (0.993–1.000)) and inter-observer variability (3Mensio: ICC 1.000 (0.999–1.000); CVI42: ICC 1.000 (1.000–1.000); Syngo.Via: ICC 0.996 (0.985–0.999)) for all software types. Contrast-enhanced MDCT-derived AVC scores are interchangeable between and reproducible within different commercially available software solutions. This is important since sufficient reproducibility, interchangeability and valid results represent prerequisites for accurate TAVR planning and its widespread clinical use.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the standard treatment for aortic stenosis in older patients. It increasingly relies on accurate pre-procedural planning using multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). Since little is known about the required competence levels for MDCT analyses, we comprehensively assessed MDCT TAVR planning reproducibility and accuracy with regard to valve selection in various healthcare workers. 20 randomly selected MDCT of TAVR patients were analyzed using dedicated software by healthcare professionals with varying backgrounds and experience (two structural interventionalists, one imaging specialist, one cardiac surgeon, one general physician, and one medical student). Following the analysis, the most appropriate Edwards SAPIEN 3™ and Medtronic CoreValve valve size was selected. Intra- and inter-observer variability were assessed. The first structural interventionalist was considered as reference standard for inter-observer comparison. Excellent intra- and inter-observer variability was found for the entire group in regard to the MDCT measurements. The best intra-observer agreement and reproducibility were found for the structural interventionalist, while the medical student had the lowest reproducibility. The highest inter-observer agreement was between both structural interventionalists, followed by the imaging specialist. As to valve size selection, the structural interventionalist showed the highest intra-observer reproducibility, independent of the brand of valve used. Compared to the reference structural interventionalist, the second structural interventionalist showed the highest inter-observer agreement for valve size selection [ICC 0.984, 95% CI 0.969–0.991] followed by the cardiac surgeon [ICC 0.947, 95%CI 0.900–0.972]. The lowest inter-observer agreement was found for the medical student [ICC 0.507, 95%CI 0.067–0.739]. While current state-of-the-art MDCT analysis software provides excellent reproducibility for anatomical measurements, the highest levels of confidence in terms of valve size selection were achieved by the performing interventional physicians. This was most likely attributable to observer experience.

Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Aims There is evidence to suggest that subtype of aortic stenosis (AS), degree of myocardial fibrosis (MF) and level of aortic valve calcification (AVC) are associated with adverse cardiac outcome in AS. Since little is known about their respective contribution, we sought to investigate their relative importance and interplay as well as association with adverse cardiac events. Methods 100 consecutive patients with severe AS and indication for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) were prospectively enrolled between January 2017 and October 2018. Patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography, multi detector computed tomography (MDCT) and left ventricular endomyocardial biopsy at the time of TAVR. Results The final study cohort consisted of 92 patients with completed study protocol comprising of 39 (42.4 %) normal ejection fraction high gradient (NEFHG), 13 (14.1 %) low EF high gradient (LEFHG), 25 (27.2 %) low EF (flow) low gradient (LEFLG) and 15 (16.3 %) paradoxical low flow low gradient (PLFLG) AS. The high gradient phenotypes (NEFHG and LEFHG) showed the largest amount of AVC (807 ± 421; 813 ± 281 mm³ respectively) as compared to the low gradient phenotypes (LEFLG and PLFLG; 503 ± 326; 555 ± 594 mm³ respectively, p < 0.05). Conversely, MF was most prevalent in low output phenotypes (LEFLG > LEFHG > PLFLG > HEFHG, p < 0.05). This was paralleled by larger cardiovascular mortality within 600 days post TAVR (LEFLG n = 7 > PLFLG n = 4 > LEFHG n = 2 > NEFHG n = 1). In Patients with high MF burden a higher AVC was associated with a lower mortality (p = 0.045, HR = 0.261, 95%CI 0.07-0.97). Within LEFLG AS, patients with larger AVC (>476.8 mm³) had larger MF (40.2%) and higher cardiovascular mortality (n = 5) as compared to patients with lower AVC (£476.8 mm³, 17.1% MF, p = 0.027, cardiovascular mortality n = 2). Conclusion MF is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcome following TAVR which is most prevalent in low ejection fraction situations. In the presence of large MF burden patients with large AVC have better outcome following TAVR. Conversely worse outcome in large MF and relatively little AVC may be explained by a relative prominence of an underlying cardiomyopathy while better survival rates in large AVC patients may indicate severe AS associated pressure overload relief and subsequently improved survival following TAVR.