Outcomes in Chronic Hemodynamically Significant Aortic Regurgitation and Limitations of Current Guidelines

Li-Tan Yang; Hector I Michelena; Christopher G Scott; Maurice Enriquez-Sarano; Sorin V Pislaru; Hartzell V Schaff; Patricia A Pellikka

doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2019.01.024

Outcomes in Chronic Hemodynamically Significant Aortic Regurgitation and Limitations of Current Guidelines

J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Apr 16;73(14):1741-1752. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.01.024. Epub 2019 Mar 4.

Authors

Li-Tan Yang¹, Hector I Michelena¹, Christopher G Scott², Maurice Enriquez-Sarano¹, Sorin V Pislaru¹, Hartzell V Schaff³, Patricia A Pellikka⁴

Affiliations

¹ Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
² Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
³ Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
⁴ Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. Electronic address: [email protected].

PMID: 30846339
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.01.024

Abstract

Background: Few data exist on the contemporary profiles and outcomes of patients with significant aortic regurgitation (AR).

Objectives: This study sought to assess the benefits of aortic valve repair or replacement (AVR) and the prognostic value of left ventricular (LV) dimensions in significant AR.

Methods: From 2006 to 2017, consecutive patients with ≥moderate-severe chronic AR without prior heart surgery, myocardial infarction, or overt coronary artery disease were included.

Results: Of 748 participants (58 ± 17 years of age; 82% men), 387 (52%) were medically treated, and 361 (48%) had AVR. Of 361 patients having AVR, 334 (93%) met guideline criteria: Class I indications in 284 (79%) patients, which included symptoms in 236, and Class II indications in 50 (14%). The remaining 27 (7%) opted for surgery without Class I or II indications. At a median follow-up of 4.9 years (interquartile range: 2.3 to 8.3 years), 125 (17%) patients had died. Age, comorbidities, baseline symptoms, and higher LV end-systolic dimension index (LVESDi) were associated with all-cause mortality (all p ≤ 0.01). Compared with patients having LVESDi <20 mm/m², those with LVESDi 20 to 25 mm/m² (hazard ratio: 1.53; 95% confidence interval: 1.01 to 2.31) and ≥25 mm/m² (HR: 2.23; 95% confidence interval: 1.32 to 3.77) had increased risks of death. AVR was associated with better survival (p < 0.0001). Patients with Class I indications for surgery had inferior post-operative survival (p < 0.003).

Conclusions: Class I indications for surgery, mainly symptoms, are the most common triggers for AVR. Class II indications were associated with better post-operative outcome and thus merit more attention. LVESDi was the only LV parameter independently associated with all-cause mortality and the ideal cutoff seems to be lower than previously recommended.

Keywords: aortic regurgitation; echocardiography; guideline; left ventricular dimension; prognosis; surgery.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Adult
Aged
Aortic Valve Insufficiency* / diagnosis
Aortic Valve Insufficiency* / mortality
Aortic Valve Insufficiency* / physiopathology
Aortic Valve Insufficiency* / therapy
Conservative Treatment* / methods
Conservative Treatment* / statistics & numerical data
Echocardiography / methods
Female
Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation* / methods
Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation* / statistics & numerical data
Heart Ventricles* / pathology
Heart Ventricles* / physiopathology
Hemodynamics*
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Severity of Illness Index
Stroke Volume*
Survival Analysis