Description

This CME activity includes questions regarding a study about a novel method of calculating aortic valve area via phase contrast-CMR in comparison to invasive determination via the Gorlin-formula.

Purpose/Objective

What is the current state/problem in practice?
Currently, transthoracic echocardiography represents the routine standard to assess aortic valve stenosis. However, especially in patients presenting with low flow-states, this examination bears some limitations. PC-CMR is a promising tool to overcome this problem.

What is the ideal state/if the problem is gone?
Aortic valve stenosis is the most common interventionally treated valvular heart disease, and an untreated symptomatic aortic stenosis has a very poor prognosis. Our novel method to determine aortic valve area is an aspiring approach adding to the diagnostic process of this disease entity, which again has an impact on therapeutic decision making.

Learning Objectives

To close the gap outlined above:

1. Learners need to know about the possibility of a precise determination of aortic valve area via PC-CMR in patients with aortic stenosis, especially in those where echocardiography reaches its limits.

2. Learners need to know how to apply our novel formula of determining aortic valve area in these patients, which is computed as the ratio of flow volume and velocity.

3. Learners need to do/perform a PC-CMR in patients with aortic stenosis, especially when echocardiographic findings are inconclusive.
 

Accreditation Statement
The Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

Credit Designation Statement
The Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) designates this Journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit (s)™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

Instructions for Claiming CME

• Attend the sessions in full for which credit is sought
• Complete the post-activity evaluation
• A certificate of completion will be available once the evaluation is submitted

Financial Disclosures
The planners and faculty for this activity did not have any relationships to disclose.

Disclosure of Commercial Suppor

None

Bibliography

Delgado et al. How Do We Reconcile Echocardiography, Computed Tomography, and Hybrid Imaging in Assessing Discordant Grading of Aortic Stenosis Severity? JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019;12(2):267-282. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.11.027.

Woldendorp et al. Evaluation of aortic stenosis using cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a systematic review & meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2020;22(1):45. doi: 10.1186/s12968-020-00633-z.

Garcia et al. Discrepancies between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and Doppler echocardiography in the measurement of transvalvular gradient in aortic stenosis: the effect of flow vorticity. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2013;15(1):84. doi: 10.1186/1532-429X-15-84.

Garcia et al. Assessment of aortic valve stenosis severity: A new index based on the energy loss concept. Circulation. 2000;101(7):765-71. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.101.7.765.