The paper highlights that pure aortic stenosis in subjects under 50 is not as rare as widely believed and can be easily overlooked.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Prompts consideration of pure aortic stenosis in patients under 50; challenges consensus and leaves open need for contemporary validation.
This paper is concerned with cases of pure aortic stenosis occurring in subjects under the age of 50 years. Many papers have been written since Monckeberg contributed the first systematic investigation of aortic stenosis in 1904.' It has been studied from many aspects, but most authors have been concerned with aortic stenosis of any degree, accompanied or not by incompetence, and irrespective of the age of the patient. Exception to this general rule has been provided by Galla- vardin (1909, 1921, 1936) who contributed three papers on the subject of pure aortic stenosis, though many of his cases were not pure in the strictest sense, as there was accompanying incompetence, but only of such a degree that it could not be suspected by examination of the peripheral circulation or blood pressure. Gallavardin's conclusions have received little consideration from the British and American schools. It is widely held that pure aortic stenosis is rare and it is one of the objects of this paper to show that this idea is exaggerated. The fact that stenosis of the aortic valve can be pure should not be unacceptable when pulmonary stenosis is generally so. Pure aortic stenosis, particularly when it occurs in young people, is uncommon (though not rare) and easily overlooked.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
G. A. Kiloh (1950) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: