Literature DB >> 23969478

Indexing aortic valve area by body surface area increases the prevalence of severe aortic stenosis.

Nikolaus Jander1, Christa Gohlke-Bärwolf, Edda Bahlmann, Eva Gerdts, Kurt Boman, John B Chambers, Kenneth Egstrup, Christoph A Nienaber, Terje R Pedersen, Simon Ray, Anne B Rossebø, Ronnie Willenheimer, Rolf-Peter Kienzle, Kristian Wachtell, Franz-Josef Neumann, Jan Minners.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To account for differences in body size in patients with aortic stenosis, aortic valve area (AVA) is divided by body surface area (BSA) to calculate indexed AVA (AVAindex). Cut-off values for severe stenosis are <1.0 cm2 for AVA and <0.6 cm2/m2 for AVAindex.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of indexation on the prevalence of severe aortic stenosis and on the predictive accuracy regarding clinical outcome.
METHODS: Echocardiographic and anthropometric data from a retrospective cohort of 2843 patients with aortic stenosis (jet velocity >2.5 m/s) and from 1525 patients prospectively followed in the simvastatin and ezetimibe in aortic stenosis (SEAS) trial were analysed.
RESULTS: The prevalence of severe stenosis increased with the AVAindex criterion compared to AVA from 71% to 80% in the retrospective cohort, and from 29% to 44% in SEAS (both p<0.001). Overall, the predictive accuracy for aortic valve events was virtually identical for AVA and AVAindex in the SEAS population (mean follow-up of 46 months; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.67 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.70) vs. 0.68 (CI 0.65 to 0.71) (NS). However, 213 patients additionally categorised as severe by AVAindex experienced significantly less valve related events than those fulfilling only the AVA criterion (p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Indexing AVA by BSA (AVAindex) significantly increases the prevalence of patients with criteria for severe stenosis by including patients with a milder degree of the disease without improving the predictive accuracy for aortic valve related events.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23969478     DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2013-304443

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart        ISSN: 1355-6037            Impact factor:   5.994


  7 in total

Review 1.  Echocardiographic Evaluation of Aortic Stenosis - Normal Flow and Low Flow Scenarios.

Authors:  Ian G Burwash
Journal:  Eur Cardiol       Date:  2014-12

2.  Low gradient aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Katie M Doucet; Ian G Burwash
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2015-05

Review 3.  Aortic Stenosis: New Insights in Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention.

Authors:  Saki Ito; Jae K Oh
Journal:  Korean Circ J       Date:  2022-10       Impact factor: 3.101

Review 4.  The contemporary role of echocardiography in the assessment and management of aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Takeshi Kitai; Rayji S Tsutsui
Journal:  J Med Ultrason (2001)       Date:  2019-12-02       Impact factor: 1.314

5.  Echocardiographic manifestations and chemical composition of stenotic bicuspid aortic valves.

Authors:  Ching-Li Cheng; Hsiao-Huang Chang; Pei-Jung Huang; Wei-Chen Wang; Shan-Yang Lin
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2018-06-05       Impact factor: 3.896

6.  A Framework for Analyzing the Whole Body Surface Area from a Single View.

Authors:  Marco Piccirilli; Gianfranco Doretto; Donald Adjeroh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Echocardiographic Imaging Challenges in Obesity: Guideline Recommendations and Limitations of Adjusting to Body Size.

Authors:  Maninder Singh; Anuradha Sethi; Abhishek K Mishra; Navin K Subrayappa; Dwight D Stapleton; Patricia A Pellikka
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2020-01-09       Impact factor: 5.501

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.