TY - JOUR
T1 - Survival in patients with severe aortic regurgitation and severe left ventricular dysfunction is improved by aortic valve replacement results from a cohort of 166 patients with an ejection fraction ≤35%
AU - Kamath, Ashvin R.
AU - Varadarajan, Padmini
AU - Turk, Rami
AU - Sampat, Unnati
AU - Patel, Reena
AU - Khandhar, Sumit
AU - Pai, Ramdas G.
PY - 2009
Y1 - 2009
N2 - Background-Aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with severe aortic regurgitation (AR) and left ventricular (LV) dysfunction entails a higher surgical risk. Though it may improve symptoms and LV size, it is not known whether it translates into a survival benefit. Methods and Results-This retrospective cohort study included patients screened from our echocardiographic database between 1993 and 2007 for patients with severe AR and LV ejection fraction (EF) ≤35%. Charts reviews were conducted for clinical, pharmacological, and surgical information. Mortality data were obtained from the social security death index and analyzed as a function of AVR adjusted for the propensity score. Of the 785 patients with severe AR, 166 patients had severe LV dysfunction defined as an EF ≤35%: 69% of these were men, age 65±16 years, and LV EF was 23 ±8%. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that performance of AVR (n=53) was associated with a better survival (P=0.001). Adjusted for the propensity score, AVR was associated with a significantly lower mortality hazard (HR 0.59, CI 0.42 to 0.98, P=0.04). Conclusions-There is a clear reluctance to offer AVR in a large number of patients with severe AR associated with LV dysfunction. However, the performance of AVR in these patients is associated with a mortality benefit supporting the current ACC/AHA guidelines.
AB - Background-Aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with severe aortic regurgitation (AR) and left ventricular (LV) dysfunction entails a higher surgical risk. Though it may improve symptoms and LV size, it is not known whether it translates into a survival benefit. Methods and Results-This retrospective cohort study included patients screened from our echocardiographic database between 1993 and 2007 for patients with severe AR and LV ejection fraction (EF) ≤35%. Charts reviews were conducted for clinical, pharmacological, and surgical information. Mortality data were obtained from the social security death index and analyzed as a function of AVR adjusted for the propensity score. Of the 785 patients with severe AR, 166 patients had severe LV dysfunction defined as an EF ≤35%: 69% of these were men, age 65±16 years, and LV EF was 23 ±8%. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that performance of AVR (n=53) was associated with a better survival (P=0.001). Adjusted for the propensity score, AVR was associated with a significantly lower mortality hazard (HR 0.59, CI 0.42 to 0.98, P=0.04). Conclusions-There is a clear reluctance to offer AVR in a large number of patients with severe AR associated with LV dysfunction. However, the performance of AVR in these patients is associated with a mortality benefit supporting the current ACC/AHA guidelines.
KW - Aortic regurgitation
KW - Aortic valve
KW - Aortic valve replacement
KW - Left ventricular dysfunction
KW - Survival
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/70349784291
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/70349784291#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.839787
DO - 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.839787
M3 - Article
C2 - 19752358
SN - 0009-7322
VL - 120
SP - S134-S138
JO - Circulation
JF - Circulation
IS - SUPPL. 1
ER -