Why the study?
Does medical therapy (statins, renin-angiotensin inhibition) prevent or alter the disease course in patients with calcific aortic valve stenosis?
Does medical therapy (statins, renin-angiotensin inhibition) prevent or alter the disease course in patients with calcific aortic valve stenosis?
Current evidence from randomized trials does not support the use of statins or renin-angiotensin inhibitors to prevent the progression of calcific aortic valve stenosis.
Does not support statin use for calcific aortic stenosis; challenges retrospective data and leaves open alternative targets.
Valve replacement is the only long-term effective treatment for calcific aortic valve stenosis. However, this treatment is aimed only at patients with advanced leaflet disease and symptoms of left ventricular obstruction. Over the past 15 years, our understanding of the pathogenesis of calcific aortic stenosis has changed significantly: away from a passive degenerative disease to an active process involving endothelial dysfunction, lipid accumulation, an inflammatory infiltrate, and a regulated process of calcification. Since many of the same processes are characteristic of atherosclerosis, trials have been undertaken to test whether medical therapy (statins, renin-angiotensin inhibition) can prevent or alter the disease course. Although retrospective and non-randomized studies suggested a positive effect with statins, benefit has not been seen in perspective randomized controlled trials, although two major studies are still in progress. Inhibition of renin-angiotensin has shown discordant results in retrospective studies with no randomized controlled data published. In the future, we need to consider other medical therapies that might target different pathways in this disease process. In addition, we need to define the optimal timing and duration of therapy for this chronic slowly progressive disease; treatments aimed at the early disease process may be ineffective with end-stage tissue changes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cawley et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: