BACKGROUND: According to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines, isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) is a class III indication for patients with asymptomatic chronic severe aortic regurgitation (AR), left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) greater than 50%, LV end-diastolic dimension less than 70 mm, and LV end-systolic dimension less than 50 mm. METHODS: We screened our echocardiographic database for all chronic severe AR patients between 1993 and 2007. Chart reviews were performed to collect clinical, demographic, and pharmacological data. Mortality was analyzed as a function of AVR. RESULTS: In all, 123 patients were found to have chronic severe asymptomatic AR; they had a mean age of 60 +/- 17 years and mean LVEF of 60% +/- 15%. A subgroup of 79 patients was found to have asymptomatic severe AR with an LVEF greater than 50%, LV end-diastolic dimension less than 70 mm, and LV end-systolic dimension less than 50 mm. By Kaplan-Meier analysis, patients not undergoing AVR had 1-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates of 86%, 71%, and 46%, respectively, compared with 100%, 94%, and 94%, respectively, for patients who underwent AVR (p = 0.004). Aortic valve replacement remained an independent predictor of increased survival after adjusting for group differences and univariate predictors of mortality. The benefit of AVR was further supported by propensity score analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Despite serving as a class III indication, AVR is independently associated with increased survival among patients with severe asymptomatic AR, LVEF greater than 50%, LV end-diastolic dimension less than 70 mm, and LV end-systolic dimension less than 50 mm. 2010 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: According to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines, isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) is a class III indication for patients with asymptomatic chronic severe aortic regurgitation (AR), left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) greater than 50%, LV end-diastolic dimension less than 70 mm, and LV end-systolic dimension less than 50 mm. METHODS: We screened our echocardiographic database for all chronic severe AR patients between 1993 and 2007. Chart reviews were performed to collect clinical, demographic, and pharmacological data. Mortality was analyzed as a function of AVR. RESULTS: In all, 123 patients were found to have chronic severe asymptomatic AR; they had a mean age of 60 +/- 17 years and mean LVEF of 60% +/- 15%. A subgroup of 79 patients was found to have asymptomatic severe AR with an LVEF greater than 50%, LV end-diastolic dimension less than 70 mm, and LV end-systolic dimension less than 50 mm. By Kaplan-Meier analysis, patients not undergoing AVR had 1-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates of 86%, 71%, and 46%, respectively, compared with 100%, 94%, and 94%, respectively, for patients who underwent AVR (p = 0.004). Aortic valve replacement remained an independent predictor of increased survival after adjusting for group differences and univariate predictors of mortality. The benefit of AVR was further supported by propensity score analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Despite serving as a class III indication, AVR is independently associated with increased survival among patients with severe asymptomatic AR, LVEF greater than 50%, LV end-diastolic dimension less than 70 mm, and LV end-systolic dimension less than 50 mm. 2010 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Hafiz Muhammad Farhan Ali Rizvi; Zaigham Rasool Khalid; Allah Baksh; Mirza Ahmad Raza Baig Journal: Pak J Med Sci Date: 2016 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 1.088