Key result
Moderate mixed aortic valve disease was associated with adverse event rates similar to severe aortic stenosis (71% vs. 68% at 5 years; p=0.49), but significantly higher than moderate AS or AR.
Why the study?
A direct comparison of outcomes between moderate mixed aortic valve disease and isolated aortic stenosis or aortic regurgitation has not been performed, making evidence-based recommendations difficult.
Cohort (n=602)
No
May support intervention for moderate mixed aortic valve disease; leaves open confirmation in randomized trials.
BACKGROUND: A direct comparison of outcomes between moderate mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) and isolated aortic stenosis (AS) or aortic regurgitation (AR) has not been performed, making evidence-based recommendations difficult in patients with MAVD. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine adverse event (AE) occurrence (the primary endpoint), defined as New York Heart Association functional class III/IV symptoms, aortic valve replacement, or cardiac death, and to compare AE rates between MAVD and isolated AS or AR. METHODS: Asymptomatic patients were identified with moderate MAVD and an ejection fraction ≥50% and were followed at Mayo Clinic from 1994 to 2013. Moderate MAVD was defined as a combination of moderate AS and moderate AR. Age- and sex-matched control groups were selected with isolated moderate AR (n = 117), moderate AS (n = 117), or severe AS (n = 117). RESULTS: At 9.1 ± 4.2 years of follow-up, patients with moderate MAVD (n = 251) had a mean age of 63 ± 11 years, 73% were male, and 38% had bicuspid valve. AE occurred in 193 (77%) patients in this group, including symptom development (69%), aortic valve replacement (67%), and cardiac death (4%). Predictors of AE were older age (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.71 per decade; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.38 to 1.97 per decade; p = 0.001), and relative wall thickness >0.42 (HR: 2.01; 95% CI: 1.86 to 2.33; p = 0.002). AE rates were similar in the MAVD and severe AS group (71% vs. 68% at 5 years; p = 0.49), but were significantly higher compared with the moderate AS and AR groups. CONCLUSIONS: MAVD patients had outcomes comparable to those with severe AS, and preserved ejection fraction and should be monitored closely for symptoms.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Egbe et al. (2016) conducted a cohort in Moderate mixed aortic valve disease (n=602). Moderate mixed aortic valve disease vs. Isolated moderate AR, moderate AS, or severe AS was evaluated on Adverse event occurrence (NYHA class III/IV symptoms, aortic valve replacement, or cardiac death) (p=0.49). Moderate mixed aortic valve disease was associated with adverse event rates similar to severe aortic stenosis (71% vs. 68% at 5 years; p=0.49), but significantly higher than moderate AS or AR.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: