Management of severe aortic stenosis in asymptomatic patients in the new AVATAR.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Narayan P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9218016 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Management of severe aortic stenosis in asymptomatic patients in the new AVATAR.
Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery 20220609 4
Management of asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis remains debatable. Until now, evidence on the subject was limited to observational studies, registry data, and meta-analyses. Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Conservative Treatment in Asymptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis trial thus is the first randomized controlled trial assessing the role of surgery in asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis. A critical evaluation of the study along with discussion on existing evidence ha ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:It is unknown how much different are the clinical outcomes between asymptomatic and symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). In the CURRENT AS registry enrolling 3,815 consecutive patients with severe AS, we compared the long-term outcomes between 1808 asymptomatic and 1215 symptomatic patients (exertional dyspnea: N = 813, syncope: N = 136, and angina: N = 266) without heart failure (HF) hospitalization. Symptomatic patients had greater AS severity, and more depressed left ventricular function than asymptomatic patients without much difference in other baseline characteristics. During a median follow-up of 3.2 years, aortic valve replacement (AVR) was performed in 62% of symptomatic patients, and 38% of asymptomatic patients. The cumulative 5-year incidences for the primary outcome measure (a composite of aortic valve-related death or HF hospitalization) was higher in symptomatic patients than in asymptomatic patients (32.3% versus 27.6%, P < 0.001). After adjusting for AVR and other variables, the greater risk of symptomatic relative to asymptomatic patients for the primary outcome measure was significant (hazard ratio 1.64, 95% confidence interval 1.41-1.96, P < 0.001). In conclusions, the excess risk of symptomatic relative to asymptomatic patients with severe AS for the aortic valve-related event was significant. However, the prevalence of AVR in symptomatic patients was not optimal.
| S-EPMC6031663 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aim of the studyPatients with asymptomatic, severe aortic stenosis are presumed to have a benign prognosis. In this retrospective cohort study, we examined the natural history of contemporary patients advised against aortic valve replacement due to a perceived lack of symptoms.Materials and methodsWe reviewed the medical records of every patient given the ICD-10-code for aortic stenosis (I35.0) at Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, between Dec 1st, 2002 and Dec 31st, 2016. Patients who were evaluated by the heart team due to severe aortic stenosis were categorized by treatment strategy. We recorded baseline data, adverse events and survival for the patients characterized as asymptomatic and for 100 age and gender matched patients scheduled for aortic valve replacement.ResultsOf 2341 patients who were evaluated for aortic valve replacement due to severe aortic stenosis, 114 patients received conservative treatment due to a lack of symptoms. Asymptomatic patients had higher mortality than patients who had aortic valve replacement, log-rank p<0.001 (mean follow-up time: 4.0 (SD: 2.5) years). Survival at 1, 2 and 3 years for the asymptomatic patients was 88%, 75% and 63%, compared with 92%, 83% and 78% in the matched patients scheduled for aortic valve replacement. 28 (25%) of the asymptomatic patients had aortic valve replacement during follow-up. Age, previous history of coronary artery disease and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were predictors of mortality and coronary artery disease and NT-proBNP were predictors of 3-year morbidity in asymptomatic patients.ConclusionsIn this retrospective study, asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis who were advised against surgery had significantly higher mortality than patients who had aortic valve replacement.
| S-EPMC8026050 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe management of severe aortic stenosis mandates consideration of aortic valve intervention for symptomatic patients. However, for asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis, recent randomised trials supported earlier intervention. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate all the available data comparing the two management strategies.MethodsPubMed, Cochrane and Web of Science databases were systematically searched from inception until 10 January 2022. The search key terms were 'asymptomatic', 'severe aortic stenosis' and 'intervention'.ResultsMeta-analysis of two published randomised trials, AVATAR and RECOVERY, included 302 patients and showed that early intervention resulted in 55% reduction in all-cause mortality (HR=0.45, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.86; I2 0%) and 79% reduction in risk of hospitalisation for heart failure (HR=0.21, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.96; I2 15%). There was no difference in risk of cardiovascular death between the two groups (HR=0.36, 95% CI 0.03 to 3.78; I2 78%). Additionally, meta-analysis of eight observational studies showed improved mortality in patients treated with early intervention (HR=0.38, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.56; I2 77%).ConclusionThis meta-analysis provides evidence that, in patients with severe asymptomatic aortic stenosis, early intervention reduces all-cause mortality and improves outcomes compared with conservative management. While this is very encouraging, further randomised controlled studies are needed to draw firm conclusions and identify the optimal timing of intervention.Prospero registration numberCRD42022301037.
| S-EPMC9109115 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives the exact timing of aortic valve replacement (AVR) in asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) remains a matter of debate. Therefore, we described the natural history of asymptomatic patients with severe AS, and the effect of AVR on long-term survival. Methods: Asymptomatic patients who were found to have severe AS between June 2006 and May 2009 were included. Severe aortic stenosis was defined as peak aortic jet velocity Vmax ≥ 4.0 m/s or aortic valve area (AVA) ≤ 1 cm2. Development of symptoms, the incidence of AVR, and all-cause mortality were assessed. Results: A total of 59 asymptomatic patients with severe AS were followed, with a mean follow-up of 8.9 ± 0.4 years. A total of 51 (86.4%) patients developed AS related symptoms, and subsequently 46 patients underwent AVR. The mean 1-year, 2-year, 5-year, and 10-year overall survival rates were higher in patients receiving AVR compared to those who did not undergo AVR during follow-up (100%, 93.5%, 89.1%, and 69.4%, versus 92.3%, 84.6%, 65.8%, and 28.2%, respectively; p < 0.001). Asymptomatic patients with severe AS receiving AVR during follow-up showed an incremental benefit in survival of up to 31.9 months compared to conservatively managed patients (p = 0.002). Conclusions: The majority of asymptomatic patients turn symptomatic during follow-up. AVR during follow-up is associated with better survival in asymptomatic severe AS patients.
| S-EPMC8066001 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9725085 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular disease in developed countries. Until now, the specific timing of intervention for asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction remains controversial. Methods: A systematic search of four databases (Pubmed, Web of science, Cochrane library, Embase) was conducted. Studies of asymptomatic patients with severe AS or very severe AS and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction underwent early aortic valve replacement (AVR) or conservative care were included. The end points included all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and non-cardiac mortality. Results: Four eligible studies were identified with a total of 1,249 participants. Compared to conservative management, patients who underwent early AVR were associated with lower all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and non-cardiac mortality rate (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09-0.31, P < 0.00001; OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02-0.62, P = 0.01; OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.21-0.63, P = 0.0003, respectively). Conclusions: Early AVR is preferable for asymptomatic severe AS patients with preserved ejection fraction.
| S-EPMC7887283 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between aortic valve area (AVA) obtained by Doppler echocardiography and outcome in patients with severe asymptomatic aortic stenosis and to define a specific threshold of AVA for identifying asymptomatic patients at very high risk based on their clinical outcome. We included 199 patients with asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AVA ≤1.0 cm(2)). The risk of events (death or need for aortic valve replacement) increased linearly on the scale of log hazard with decreased AVA (adjusted hazard ratio 1.17; 95% CI 1.06-1.29 per 0.1 cm(2) AVA decrement; P=0.002). Event-free survival at 12, 24, and 48 months was 63±6%, 51±6%, and 34±6%, respectively, for AVA 0.8 to 1 cm(2); 49±6%, 36±6%, and 26±6%, respectively, for AVA 0.6 to 0.8 cm(2); and 33±8%, 20±7%, and 11±5%, respectively, for AVA ≤0.6 cm(2) (Ptrend=0.002). Patients with AVA ≤0.6 cm(2) had a significantly increased risk of events compared with patients with AVA 0.8 to 1 cm(2) (adjusted hazard ratio 2.22; 95% CI 1.41-3.52; P=0.001), whereas patients with AVA 0.6 to 0.8 cm(2) had an increased risk of events compared with those with AVA 0.8 to 1 cm(2), but the difference was not statistically significant (adjusted hazard ratio 1.38; 95% CI 0.93-2.05; P=0.11). After adjustment for covariates and aortic valve replacement as a time-dependent variable, patients with AVA ≤0.6 cm(2) had a significantly greater risk of all-cause mortality than patients with AVA >0.6 cm(2) (hazard ratio 3.39; 95% CI 1.80-6.40; P<0.0001). Patients with severe asymptomatic aortic stenosis and AVA ≤0.6 cm(2) displayed an important increase in the risk of adverse events during short-term follow-up. Further studies are needed to determine whether elective aortic valve replacement improves outcome in this high-risk subgroup of patients.
| S-EPMC4889185 | biostudies-literature
Project description:New insights into the natural history and pathophysiology of patients with aortic stenosis (AS), coupled with the dramatic evolution of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), are fuelling intense interest in the management of asymptomatic patients with severe AS. This patient presenting for elective intervention poses a unique challenge. These patients are not traditionally offered surgical aortic valve replacement or TAVI given their lack of symptoms; however, they are at increased risk given the severity of their AS. Furthermore, clinical experience has shown that symptoms can be challenging to ascertain in many sedentary, deconditioned, and/or elderly patients. In addition, evolving data based on imaging and biomarker evidence of adverse ventricular remodelling, hypertrophy, inflammation, or fibrosis may radically transform existing clinical decision paradigms. However, management of asymptomatic severe AS is otherwise controversial and the decision to intervene requires careful assessment of the benefits and risks in an individual patient. Further randomized trials [EARLY TAVI (NCT03042104), AVATAR (NCT02436655), EVOLVED (NCT03094143)] will help determine future recommendations.
| S-EPMC9653144 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Data are scarce on the role of aortic valve area (AVA) to identify those patients with asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) who are at high risk of adverse events. We sought to explore the prognostic impact of AVA in asymptomatic patients with severe AS in a large observational database. Methods and Results Among 3815 consecutive patients with severe AS enrolled in the CURRENT AS (Contemporary Outcomes After Surgery and Medical Treatment in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis) registry, the present study included 1309 conservatively managed asymptomatic patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50%. The study patients were subdivided into 3 groups based on AVA (group 1: AVA >0.80 cm2, N=645; group 2: 0.8 cm2 ≥AVA >0.6 cm2, N=465; and group 3: AVA ≤0.6 cm2, N=199). The prevalence of very severe AS patients (peak aortic jet velocity ≥5 m/s or mean aortic pressure gradient ≥60 mm Hg) was 2.0%, 5.8%, and 26.1% in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The cumulative 5-year incidence of AVR was not different across the 3 groups (39.7%, 43.7%, and 39.9%; P=0.43). The cumulative 5-year incidence of the primary outcome measure (a composite of aortic valve-related death or heart failure hospitalization) was incrementally higher with decreasing AVA (24.1%, 29.1%, and 48.1%; P<0.001). After adjusting for confounders, the excess risk of group 3 and group 2 relative to group 1 for the primary outcome measure remained significant (hazard ratio, 2.21, 95% CI, 1.56-3.11, P<0.001; and hazard ratio, 1.34, 95% CI, 1.01-1.78, P=0.04, respectively). Conclusions AVA ≤0.6 cm2 would be a useful marker to identify those high-risk patients with asymptomatic severe AS, who might benefit from early AVR. Clinical Trial Registration URL: www.umin.ac.jp . Unique identifier: UMIN000012140.
| S-EPMC6405588 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Characteristics and prognosis of hemodialysis patients with severe aortic stenosis have not yet been well defined. The CURRENT AS (contemporary outcomes after surgery and medical treatment in patients with severe aortic stenosis) registry, a Japanese multicenter registry, enrolled 3815 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis. There were 405 hemodialysis patients (initial aortic valve replacement [AVR] group: N=135 [33.3%], and conservative group: N=270) and 3410 nonhemodialysis patients (initial AVR group: N=1062 [31.1%], and conservative group: N=2348). The median follow-up duration after the index echocardiography was 1361 days, with 90% follow-up rate at 2 years. The cumulative 5-year incidence of all-cause death was significantly higher in hemodialysis patients than in nonhemodialysis patients in both the entire cohort (71% versus 40%, P<0.001) and in the initial AVR group (63.2% versus 17.9%, P<0.001). Among hemodialysis patients, the initial AVR group as compared with the conservative group was associated with significantly lower cumulative 5-year incidences of all-cause death (60.6% versus 75.5%, P<0.001) and sudden death (10.2% versus 31.7%, P<0.001). Nevertheless, the rate of aortic valve procedure-related death, which predominantly occurred within 6 months of the AVR procedure, was markedly higher in the hemodialysis patients than in the nonhemodialysis patients (21.2% and 2.3%, P<0.001). Among hemodialysis patients with severe aortic stenosis, the initial AVR strategy as compared with the conservative strategy was associated with significantly lower long-term mortality risk, particularly the risk for sudden death, although the effect size for the survival benefit of the initial AVR strategy was smaller than that in the nonhemodialysis patients.
| S-EPMC5586262 | biostudies-literature