Li-Tan Yang1, Hector I Michelena1, Christopher G Scott2, Maurice Enriquez-Sarano1, Sorin V Pislaru1, Hartzell V Schaff3, Patricia A Pellikka4. 1. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 2. Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 3. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 4. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. Electronic address: pellikka.patricia@mayo.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few data exist on the contemporary profiles and outcomes of patients with significant aortic regurgitation (AR). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the benefits of aortic valve repair or replacement (AVR) and the prognostic value of left ventricular (LV) dimensions in significant AR. METHODS: From 2006 to 2017, consecutive patients with ≥moderate-severe chronic AR without prior heart surgery, myocardial infarction, or overt coronary artery disease were included. RESULTS: Of 748 participants (58 ± 17 years of age; 82% men), 387 (52%) were medically treated, and 361 (48%) had AVR. Of 361 patients having AVR, 334 (93%) met guideline criteria: Class I indications in 284 (79%) patients, which included symptoms in 236, and Class II indications in 50 (14%). The remaining 27 (7%) opted for surgery without Class I or II indications. At a median follow-up of 4.9 years (interquartile range: 2.3 to 8.3 years), 125 (17%) patients had died. Age, comorbidities, baseline symptoms, and higher LV end-systolic dimension index (LVESDi) were associated with all-cause mortality (all p ≤ 0.01). Compared with patients having LVESDi <20 mm/m2, those with LVESDi 20 to 25 mm/m2 (hazard ratio: 1.53; 95% confidence interval: 1.01 to 2.31) and ≥25 mm/m2 (HR: 2.23; 95% confidence interval: 1.32 to 3.77) had increased risks of death. AVR was associated with better survival (p < 0.0001). Patients with Class I indications for surgery had inferior post-operative survival (p < 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Class I indications for surgery, mainly symptoms, are the most common triggers for AVR. Class II indications were associated with better post-operative outcome and thus merit more attention. LVESDi was the only LV parameter independently associated with all-cause mortality and the ideal cutoff seems to be lower than previously recommended.
BACKGROUND: Few data exist on the contemporary profiles and outcomes of patients with significant aortic regurgitation (AR). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the benefits of aortic valve repair or replacement (AVR) and the prognostic value of left ventricular (LV) dimensions in significant AR. METHODS: From 2006 to 2017, consecutive patients with ≥moderate-severe chronic AR without prior heart surgery, myocardial infarction, or overt coronary artery disease were included. RESULTS: Of 748 participants (58 ± 17 years of age; 82% men), 387 (52%) were medically treated, and 361 (48%) had AVR. Of 361 patients having AVR, 334 (93%) met guideline criteria: Class I indications in 284 (79%) patients, which included symptoms in 236, and Class II indications in 50 (14%). The remaining 27 (7%) opted for surgery without Class I or II indications. At a median follow-up of 4.9 years (interquartile range: 2.3 to 8.3 years), 125 (17%) patients had died. Age, comorbidities, baseline symptoms, and higher LV end-systolic dimension index (LVESDi) were associated with all-cause mortality (all p ≤ 0.01). Compared with patients having LVESDi <20 mm/m2, those with LVESDi 20 to 25 mm/m2 (hazard ratio: 1.53; 95% confidence interval: 1.01 to 2.31) and ≥25 mm/m2 (HR: 2.23; 95% confidence interval: 1.32 to 3.77) had increased risks of death. AVR was associated with better survival (p < 0.0001). Patients with Class I indications for surgery had inferior post-operative survival (p < 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Class I indications for surgery, mainly symptoms, are the most common triggers for AVR. Class II indications were associated with better post-operative outcome and thus merit more attention. LVESDi was the only LV parameter independently associated with all-cause mortality and the ideal cutoff seems to be lower than previously recommended.
Authors: Maria J Eriksson; Kenneth Caidahl; Jonas Jenner; Ali Ilami; Johan Petrini; Per Eriksson; Anders Franco-Cereceda Journal: Cardiovasc Ultrasound Date: 2021-02-14 Impact factor: 2.062
Authors: Alaa Alashi; Nicholas G Smedira; Kevin Hodges; Zoran B Popovic; Maran Thamilarasan; Per Wierup; Harry M Lever; Milind Y Desai Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2020-12-21 Impact factor: 5.501