BACKGROUND: Calcific aortic stenosis (AS) is a disease of the elderly. However, there is reluctance to offer aortic valve replacement (AVR) for elderly patients with severe AS. We investigated if AVR confers a survival benefit in elderly patients with severe AS. METHODS: We screened our echocardiographic database from 1993 to 2003 for patients with severe AS (AV area < or = 0.8 cm2) and age > or =80 years. Two hundred and seventy seven patients were identified. Complete chart reviews were performed for clinical data. Mortality data were obtained from National Death Index. Survival curves of patients who underwent AVR during the follow-up period were compared with those managed nonsurgically. RESULTS: Patient characteristics were as follows: age 85+/-4 years, 53% male, AV area 0.68+/-0.16 cm2, EF 52+/-20%, CAD 47%, diabetes 17%. Over a mean follow-up of 2.5 years, 55 (20%) had AVR and there were 175 deaths. One-year, 2-year and 5-year survival rates among patients with AVR were 87, 78 and 68% respectively, compared with 52, 40 and 22%, respectively, in those who had no AVR (p < 0.0001). Hazard ratio for death with AVR adjusted for 19 covariates including age, EF, gender, comorbidities and pharmacotherapy was 0.38 (95% CI 0.26-0.66, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Prognosis of medically managed severe calcific AS in the elderly patients is dismal. AVR appears to improve survival of these patients and should be strongly considered in the absence of other major comorbidities.
BACKGROUND:Calcific aortic stenosis (AS) is a disease of the elderly. However, there is reluctance to offer aortic valve replacement (AVR) for elderly patients with severe AS. We investigated if AVR confers a survival benefit in elderly patients with severe AS. METHODS: We screened our echocardiographic database from 1993 to 2003 for patients with severe AS (AV area < or = 0.8 cm2) and age > or =80 years. Two hundred and seventy seven patients were identified. Complete chart reviews were performed for clinical data. Mortality data were obtained from National Death Index. Survival curves of patients who underwent AVR during the follow-up period were compared with those managed nonsurgically. RESULTS:Patient characteristics were as follows: age 85+/-4 years, 53% male, AV area 0.68+/-0.16 cm2, EF 52+/-20%, CAD 47%, diabetes 17%. Over a mean follow-up of 2.5 years, 55 (20%) had AVR and there were 175 deaths. One-year, 2-year and 5-year survival rates among patients with AVR were 87, 78 and 68% respectively, compared with 52, 40 and 22%, respectively, in those who had no AVR (p < 0.0001). Hazard ratio for death with AVR adjusted for 19 covariates including age, EF, gender, comorbidities and pharmacotherapy was 0.38 (95% CI 0.26-0.66, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Prognosis of medically managed severe calcific AS in the elderly patients is dismal. AVR appears to improve survival of these patients and should be strongly considered in the absence of other major comorbidities.
Authors: George J Arnaoutakis; Timothy J George; Diane E Alejo; Christian A Merlo; William A Baumgartner; Duke E Cameron; Ashish S Shah Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2011-04-17 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Akshat Saxena; Chin-Leng Poh; Diem T Dinh; Christopher M Reid; Julian A Smith; Gilbert C Shardey; Andrew E Newcomb Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Ivar Friedrich; Andreas Simm; Joachim Kötting; Frank Thölen; Burkhard Fischer; Rolf-Edgar Silber Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2009-06-19 Impact factor: 5.594