Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 9, 2025

Investigating Aortic Valve Calcification via Isolation and Culture of T Lymphocytes using Feeder Cells from Irradiated Buffy Coat
Published on: February 4, 2021
Prognostic and therapeutic implications of a low aortic valve calcium score in patients with low-gradient aortic
D Juhász1, M Vecsey-Nagy1,2, Á L Jermendy1
1Heart and Vascular Centre, Semmelweis University, 68. Varosmajor u, 1122-Budapest, Hungary.
Insights
In low-gradient aortic stenosis (LGAS), aortic valve calcium score (AVCS) does not predict prognosis. However, aortic valve intervention (AVI) significantly improves survival in symptomatic LGAS patients with low AVCS.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Medical Imaging
- Interventional Cardiology
Background:
- Low-gradient (LG) aortic stenosis (AS) presents diagnostic challenges.
- Aortic valve calcium score (AVCS) is used when echocardiography is discordant.
- The prognostic value of AVCS in LGAS requires further investigation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine the prognostic significance of AVCS in LGAS.
- To assess if symptomatic LGAS patients with low AVCS benefit from aortic valve intervention (AVI).
Main Methods:
- 327 symptomatic severe AS patients (for TAVI planning) were analyzed.
- AVCS was measured; low AVCS defined by sex-specific thresholds.
- Patients were categorized into high-gradient (HG) AS and LGAS groups.
- Outcomes were assessed over a median follow-up of 4.9 years.
- Propensity score matching compared AVI versus medical treatment.
Main Results:
- Low AVCS was more prevalent in LGAS (40%) than HGAS (10%).
- AVCS predicted mortality in HGAS but not in LGAS.
- In LGAS patients with low AVCS, AVI (94% TAVI) significantly improved survival compared to medical treatment (aHR: 0.102).
Conclusions:
- Low AVCS is common in LGAS and does not indicate a better prognosis.
- Symptomatic LGAS patients with low AVCS benefit from AVI.
- AVI offers similar survival benefits in LGAS patients regardless of AVCS level, comparable to HGAS patients.
Aims:
Low-gradient (LG) aortic stenosis (AS) poses a diagnostic challenge. Aortic valve calcium score (AVCS) assessment has emerged as a complementary diagnostic method when echocardiography provides discordant results. However, the diagnostic and prognostic values of AVCS in LGAS have not been thoroughly studied. Our aims in this study were to investigate the prognostic importance of AVCS in LGAS and to assess whether symptomatic patients with LGAS and low AVCS may benefit from aortic valve intervention (AVI).
Methods And Results:
A total of 327 symptomatic patients (78.5 ± 7.3 years, 51% women) with severe AS defined by the aortic valve area who underwent computed tomography for transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI) planning were enrolled. AVCS was measured. AVCS < 2000AU in men and < 1200 AU in women was considered a low AVCS. A total of 243 patients had high gradient (HG) and 84 had LGAS. A low AVCS was present in 25 (10%) patients with HG and 34 (40%) with LGAS. Over a median follow-up period of 4.9 years, 194 deaths occurred. In multivariate analysis, AVCS was a significant independent predictor of all-cause mortality among patients with HGAS [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 2.317; CI: 1.104-4.861; P = 0.026] but not among those with LGAS (aHR: 0.848; CI: 0.434-1.658; P = 0.630). After propensity score matching between patients who underwent AVI and those who were medically treated, AVI (94% TAVI) was a significant and independent predictor of survival among LGAS patients with a low AVCS even after adjustment for clinical variables (aHR: 0.102, CI: 0.028-0.369; P < 0.001).
Conclusion:
The prevalence of a low AVCS is much higher in patients with LGAS than in those with HGAS. In patients with symptomatic severe LGAS, a low AVCS does not entail a better prognosis. AVI is equally beneficial in LGAS patients with a high or low AVCS, similarly to those with HGAS.
Related Concept Videos
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System VI: Calcium -Scoring CT
Aortic Regurgitation I: Introduction
Aortic Regurgitation IV: Nursing Management
Mitral Stenosis I: Introduction
Mitral Valve Prolapse II: Assessment and Management

