Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Apr 16;73(14):1741-1752. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.01.024. Epub 2019 Mar 4.
Few data exist on the contemporary profiles and outcomes of patients with significant aortic regurgitation (AR).
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.
From 2006 to 2017, consecutive patients with ≥moderate-severe chronic AR without prior heart surgery, myocardial infarction, or overt coronary artery disease were included.
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/m, those with LVESDi 20 to 25 mm/m (hazard ratio: 1.53; 95% confidence interval: 1.01 to 2.31) and ≥25 mm/m (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).
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.
目前关于严重主动脉瓣反流(AR)患者的当代特征和结局的数据较少。
本研究旨在评估主动脉瓣修复或置换(AVR)的益处,以及左心室(LV)大小在严重 AR 中的预后价值。
2006 年至 2017 年,连续纳入未经心脏手术、心肌梗死或明显冠状动脉疾病的≥中重度慢性 AR 患者。
748 名参与者(58±17 岁;82%为男性)中,387 名(52%)接受药物治疗,361 名(48%)接受 AVR。在 361 名接受 AVR 的患者中,334 名(93%)符合指南标准:284 名患者(79%)为 I 类适应证,其中 236 名有症状,50 名(14%)为 II 类适应证。其余 27 名(7%)无 I 类或 II 类适应证而选择手术。中位随访 4.9 年(四分位距:2.3 至 8.3 年)期间,125 名(17%)患者死亡。年龄、合并症、基线症状和较高的左心室末期收缩内径指数(LVESDi)与全因死亡率相关(均 p≤0.01)。与 LVESDi<20mm/m 的患者相比,LVESDi 为 20 至 25mm/m(风险比:1.53;95%置信区间:1.01 至 2.31)和≥25mm/m(HR:2.23;95%置信区间:1.32 至 3.77)的患者死亡风险增加。AVR 与更好的生存率相关(p<0.0001)。有手术 I 类适应证的患者术后生存较差(p<0.003)。
手术 I 类适应证,主要是症状,是 AVR 最常见的触发因素。II 类适应证与术后更好的结局相关,因此值得更多关注。LVESDi 是唯一与全因死亡率独立相关的 LV 参数,理想的截断值似乎低于之前的推荐值。