Why the study?
Patients with combined lesions are generally excluded from studies on left-sided valve disease, leaving their clinical management and prognosis unclear.
Does combined left-sided valve disease worsen mortality and need for intervention compared to single-lesion valve disease in patients with at least moderate severity?
Does combined left-sided valve disease worsen mortality and need for intervention compared to single-lesion valve disease in patients with at least moderate severity?
Combined left-sided valve disease is associated with significantly worse overall survival compared to single-lesion valve disease, particularly when aortic stenosis is combined with mitral regurgitation.
Combined valve lesions may warrant closer surveillance; this Level 3 cohort finding leaves open whether intervention thresholds should differ from single-lesion disease.
In studies on left-sided valve disease, patients with combined lesions are generally excluded. We aimed to describe the clinical management and prognosis of patients with combined left-sided valve disease.From a single, tertiary care center, a total of 122 patients with combined left-sided valve disease of at least moderate severity were identified and compared with 143 controls with single-lesion valve disease (1VaD) of at least moderate severity. Endpoints were all-cause mortality and the combination of valve intervention and mortality.Overall survival for patients with two-lesion valve disease was significantly lower than that for patients with 1VaD (estimated 3-year survival: 52% versus 73%, P < 0.001). Compared with 1VaD, the combination of aortic stenosis and aortic regurgitation (AS/AR) was associated with a similar overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval (CI) ): 0.83 (0.47-1.48), P = 0.53), the combination of AR and mitral regurgitation (AR/MR) with an intermediate survival (HR (95% CI): 1.76 (1.03-3.00), P = 0.039) and the combination of AS and MR (AS/MR) with the poorest survival (HR (95% CI): 3.28 (2.16-4.98), P < 0.001). At 2.2 years of follow-up, the majority of patients in all three groups were either dead or had received valve intervention (AS/AR: 72%, AR/MR: 64%, and AS/MR: 80%).Combined valve disease was relatively rare but was associated with a decreased overall survival. Survival depended on the specific combination of valve lesions, with AS/MR carrying the worst prognosis. The majority of patients in all groups were either dead or had valve intervention performed within 2.2 years.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sillesen et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: