OBJECTIVE: Symptomatic severe aortic stenosis is an indication for aortic valve replacement. Some patients are denied intervention. This study provides insight into the proportion of conservatively treated patients and into the reasons why conservative treatment is chosen. METHODS: Of a patient cohort presenting with severe aortic stenosis between 2004 and 2007, medical records were retrospectively analyzed. Only symptomatic patients (n=179) were included. We studied their characteristics, treatment decisions, and survival. RESULTS: Mean age was 71 years, 50% were male. During follow-up (mean 17 months, 99% complete) 76 (42%) patients were scheduled for surgical treatment (63 conventional valve replacement, 10 transcatheter, 1 heart transplantation, 2 waiting list) versus 101 (56%) who received medical treatment. Reasons for medical treatment were: perceived high operative risk (34%), symptoms regarded mild (19%), stenosis perceived non-severe (14%), and patient preference (9%). In 5% the decision was pending at the time of the analysis and in 20% the reason was other/unclear. Mean age of the surgical group was 68 years versus 73 years for medically treated patients (p=0.004). Predicted mortality (EuroSCORE) was 7.8% versus 11.3% (p=0.006). During follow-up 12 patients died in the surgical group (no 30-day operative mortality), versus 28 in the medical group. Two-year survival was 90% versus 69%. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion (56%) of symptomatic patients does not undergo aortic valve replacement. Often operative risk is estimated (too) high or hemodynamic severity and symptomatic status are misclassified. Interdisciplinary team discussions between cardiologists and surgeons should be encouraged to optimize patient selection for surgery.
OBJECTIVE: Symptomatic severe aortic stenosis is an indication for aortic valve replacement. Some patients are denied intervention. This study provides insight into the proportion of conservatively treated patients and into the reasons why conservative treatment is chosen. METHODS: Of a patient cohort presenting with severe aortic stenosis between 2004 and 2007, medical records were retrospectively analyzed. Only symptomatic patients (n=179) were included. We studied their characteristics, treatment decisions, and survival. RESULTS: Mean age was 71 years, 50% were male. During follow-up (mean 17 months, 99% complete) 76 (42%) patients were scheduled for surgical treatment (63 conventional valve replacement, 10 transcatheter, 1 heart transplantation, 2 waiting list) versus 101 (56%) who received medical treatment. Reasons for medical treatment were: perceived high operative risk (34%), symptoms regarded mild (19%), stenosis perceived non-severe (14%), and patient preference (9%). In 5% the decision was pending at the time of the analysis and in 20% the reason was other/unclear. Mean age of the surgical group was 68 years versus 73 years for medically treated patients (p=0.004). Predicted mortality (EuroSCORE) was 7.8% versus 11.3% (p=0.006). During follow-up 12 patients died in the surgical group (no 30-day operative mortality), versus 28 in the medical group. Two-year survival was 90% versus 69%. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion (56%) of symptomatic patients does not undergo aortic valve replacement. Often operative risk is estimated (too) high or hemodynamic severity and symptomatic status are misclassified. Interdisciplinary team discussions between cardiologists and surgeons should be encouraged to optimize patient selection for surgery.
Authors: Martin Thoenes; Peter Bramlage; Pepe Zamorano; David Messika-Zeitoun; Daniel Wendt; Markus Kasel; Jana Kurucova; Richard P Steeds Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: M W A van Geldorp; H J Heuvelman; A P Kappetein; J J V Busschbach; J J M Takkenberg; A J J C Bogers Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 2.380
Authors: M W A van Geldorp; H J Heuvelman; A P Kappetein; J J V Busschbach; D J Cohen; J J M Takkenberg; A J J C Bogers Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 2.380
Authors: H J Heuvelman; M W A van Geldorp; A P Kappetein; M L Geleijnse; T W Galema; A J J C Bogers; J J M Takkenberg Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 2.380
Authors: Kjersti Oterhals; Rune Haaverstad; Jan Erik Nordrehaug; Geir Egil Eide; Tone M Norekvål Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-08-21 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Kumar Dharmarajan; Jill Foster; Megan Coylewright; Philip Green; John P Vavalle; Osman Faheem; Pei-Hsiu Huang; Amar Krishnaswamy; Vinod H Thourani; Lisa A McCoy; Tracy Y Wang Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-04-21 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: J Matthew Brennan; Martin B Leon; Paige Sheridan; Isabel J Boero; Qinyu Chen; Angela Lowenstern; Vinod Thourani; Sreekanth Vemulapalli; Kevin Thomas; Tracy Y Wang; Eric D Peterson Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2020-08-11 Impact factor: 5.501