Why the study?
Guidelines recommend aortic valve replacement in severe aortic regurgitation based on progressive changes in left ventricular function or size, prompting a reassessment of the clinical relevance of traditional echocardiographic measurements in routine practice.
Do longitudinal changes in traditional echocardiographic measurements (LVEDD, LVESD, and fractional shortening) predict symptom-driven aortic valve replacement, acute heart failure hospitalization, or death in patients with severe aortic regurgitation?
Cohort (n=140)
No
Do longitudinal changes in traditional echocardiographic measurements (LVEDD, LVESD, and fractional shortening) predict symptom-driven aortic valve replacement, acute heart failure hospitalization, or death in patients with severe aortic regurgitation?
In patients with severe aortic regurgitation, LVEDD does not significantly dilate over time in most patients despite carrying prognostic value, suggesting that aortic valve replacement decisions should not rely on waiting for linear progression to the 65 mm guideline threshold.
LV size predicts events in severe AR yet rarely exceeds 65 mm; challenges guideline cutoffs and leaves open optimal AVR timing.
Background Guidelines recommend aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with severe aortic regurgitation (AR) based on progressive changes in left ventricular (LV) function or size. We aimed to reassess the clinical relevance of current guideline recommendations pertaining to traditional echocardiographic measurements in routine practice. Methods Retrospective analysis of patients with severe AR who underwent serial echocardiographic follow-up over at least 18 months. The composite outcome was symptom-driven AVR, acute heart failure hospitalization, or death. We used a joint modelling approach to handle within-subject correlation and censoring. Results The cohort consisted of 140 patients, with a median follow-up of 93 months (interquartile range 58–130). LV end-systolic (LVESD) and fractional shortening (FS) showed a small but statistically significant longitudinal trend, while LVEDD did not. In three separate joint models adjusted for age at onset and sex, higher LVESD and LVEDD and lower FS were each associated with increased risk of the composite event. Each 1 mm increase in LVESD and LVEDD was associated with a 6% in risk; each 1% decrease in FS corresponded to a 12% increase in risk. Only 8 (5.7%) of patients were predicted to exceed the guideline-recommended LVEDD threshold of 65 mm over 10 years. Age at onset was also a significant risk factor, with each decade increasing risk by 65% for each of the three parallel joint models. Conclusion LV parameters show modest changes over time, despite holding strong prognostic value in patients with severe AR. LVEDD, while associated with overall risk, does not predictably or significantly dilate over time in most patients. AVR decisions should be based on comprehensive clinical and volumetric assessment rather than waiting for simple linear progression to guideline cutoffs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schwartzenberg et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Moderate-to-severe or severe chronic aortic regurgitation (n=140). Serial 2D echocardiographic LV parameters (LVESD, LVEDD, and fractional shortening) was evaluated on Composite of symptom-driven aortic valve replacement (AVR), acute heart failure hospitalization, or all-cause mortality (HR 1.06 per 1 mm increase in LVESD, 95% CI 1.02-1.11, p=<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: