Aortic Stenosis in the Older Population

• Roberts WC , KoJM. Frequency by decades of unicuspid, bicuspid, and tricuspid aortic valves in adults having isolated aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis, with or without associated aortic regurgitation. Circulation111(7), 920–925(2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Otto CM , KuusistoJ, ReichenbachDD, GownAM, O‘BrienKD. Characterization of the early lesion of ‘degenerative’ valvular aortic stenosis. histological and immunohistochemical studies. Circulation90(2), 844–853(1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindroos M , KupariM, HeikkilaJ, TilvisR. Prevalence of aortic valve abnormalities in the elderly: an echocardiographic study of a random population sample. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.21(5), 1220–1225(1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aronow WS , AhnC, KronzonI. Comparison of echocardiographic abnormalities in African–American, hispanic, and white men and women aged >60 years. Am. J. Cardiol.87(9), 1131–1133, A10 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aronow WS , FlegJL, RichMW. Ralph Erskine Conrad Memorial Fund: Cardiovascular Disease in the Elderly (4th Edition). Informa Healthcare, NY, USA (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Nassimiha D , AronowWS, AhnC, GoldmanME. Rate of progression of valvular aortic stenosis in patients > or = 60years of age. Am. J. Cardiol.87(6), 807–809, A9 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nassimiha D , AronowWS, AhnC, GoldmanME. Association of coronary risk factors with progression of valvular aortic stenosis in older persons. Am. J. Cardiol.87(11), 1313–1314(2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rossebo AB , PedersenTR, BomanKet al. Intensive lipid lowering with simvastatin and ezetimibe in aortic stenosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 359(13), 1343–1356(2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bach DS , SiaoD, GirardSE, DuvernoyC, MccallisterBD, GualanoSK. Evaluation of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis who do not undergo aortic valve replacement: the potential role of subjectively overestimated operative risk. Circ. Cardiovasc. Qual. Outcomes2(6), 533–539(2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braunwald E . On the natural history of severe aortic stenosis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.15(5), 1018–1020(1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross J , BraunwaldE. Aortic stenosis. Circulation38(1 Suppl.), S61–S67 (1968).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munt B , LeggetME, KraftCD, Miyake-HullCY, FujiokaM, OttoCM. Physical examination in valvular aortic stenosis: correlation with stenosis severity and prediction of clinical outcome. Am. Heart J.137(2), 298–306(1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonow RO , CarabelloBA, KanuCet al. American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons. ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (Writing Committee to revise the 1998 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease): developed in collaboration with the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists: endorsed by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation 114(5), e84–e231 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumgartner H , HungJ, BermejoJet al. Echocardiographic assessment of valve stenosis: EAE/ASE recommendations for clinical practice. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 22(1), 1–23, quiz 101–102 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oh JK , SewardJB, TajikAJ. The Echo Manual (3rd Edition). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, PA, USA (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Lancellotti P , MagneJ, DonalEet al. Clinical outcome in asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis: insights from the new proposed aortic stenosis grading classification. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 59(3), 235–243(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fougeres E , TribouilloyC, MonchiMet al. Outcomes of pseudo-severe aortic stenosis under conservative treatment. Eur. Heart J. 33(19), 2426–2433(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grayburn PA . Assessment of low-gradient aortic stenosis with dobutamine. Circulation113(5), 604–606(2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grayburn PA , EichhornEJ. Dobutamine challenge for low-gradient aortic stenosis. Circulation106(7), 763–765(2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monin JL , QuereJP, MonchiMet al. Low-gradient aortic stenosis: operative risk stratification and predictors for long-term outcome: a multicenter study using dobutamine stress hemodynamics. Circulation 108(3), 319–324(2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tunick PA , KronzonI. Operative risk stratification and predictors for long-term outcome in low-gradient aortic stenosis. Circulation109(5), e33, author reply e33 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tribouilloy C , LevyF, RusinaruDet al. Outcome after aortic valve replacement for low-flow/low-gradient aortic stenosis without contractile reserve on dobutamine stress echocardiography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 53(20), 1865–1873(2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozkan A , HachamovitchR, KapadiaSR, TuzcuEM, MarwickTH. Impact of aortic valve replacement on outcome of symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis with low gradient and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. Circulation128(6), 622–631(2013).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clavel MA , DumesnilJG, CapouladeR, MathieuP, SenechalM, PibarotP. Outcome of patients with aortic stenosis, small valve area, and low-flow, low-gradient despite preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.60(14), 1259–1267(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jander N , MinnersJ, HolmeIet al. Outcome of patients with low-gradient ‘severe’ aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction. Circulation 123(8), 887–895(2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rafique AM , BinerS, RayI, ForresterJS, TolstrupK, SiegelRJ. Meta-analysis of prognostic value of stress testing in patients with asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis. Am. J. Cardiol.104(7), 972–977(2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marechaux S , HachichaZ, BellouinAet al. Usefulness of exercise-stress echocardiography for risk stratification of true asymptomatic patients with aortic valve stenosis. Eur. Heart J. 31(11), 1390–1397(2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vahanian A , AlfieriO, AndreottiFet al.; Joint Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012). Eur. Heart J.33(19), 2451–2496(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lancellotti P , MoonenM, MagneJet al. Prognostic effect of long-axis left ventricular dysfunction and B-type natriuretic peptide levels in asymptomatic aortic stenosis. Am. J. Cardiol. 105(3), 383–388(2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Achenbach S , DelgadoV, HausleiterJ, SchoenhagenP, MinJK, LeipsicJA. SCCT expert consensus document on computed tomography imaging before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)/transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). J. Cardiovasc. Comput. Tomogr.6(6), 366–380(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jilaihawi H , KashifM, FontanaGet al. Cross-sectional computed tomographic assessment improves accuracy of aortic annular sizing for transcatheter aortic valve replacement and reduces the incidence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 59(14), 1275–1286(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vasa-Nicotera M , SinningJM, ChinDet al. Impact of paravalvular leakage on outcome in patients after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 5(8), 858–865(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piazza N , LangeR, MartucciG, SerruysPW. Patient selection for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: patient risk profile and anatomical selection criteria. Arch. Cardiovasc. Dis.105(3), 165–173(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nadir MA , WeiL, ElderDHet al. Impact of renin-angiotensin system blockade therapy on outcome in aortic stenosis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 58(6), 570–576(2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindman BR , ZajariasA, MadrazoJAet al. Effects of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibition on systemic and pulmonary hemodynamics and ventricular function in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Circulation 125(19), 2353–2362(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerillo AG , BevilacquaS, FarnetiPA, ConcistreG, GlauberM. Sutureless aortic valve replacement through a right minithoracotomy. J. Heart Valve Dis.21(2), 168–171(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glauber M , MiceliA, BevilacquaS, FarnetiPA. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement via right anterior minithoracotomy: early outcomes and midterm follow-up. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.142(6), 1577–1579(2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glauber M , MiceliA, GilmanovDet al. Right anterior minithoracotomy versus conventional aortic valve replacement: a propensity score matched study. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 145(5), 1222–1226(2013).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karimov JH , CerilloAG, GasbarriT, SolinasM, BevilacquaS, GlauberM. Stentless aortic valve implantation through an upper manubrium-limited V-type ministernotomy. Innovations5(5), 378–380(2010).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Concistre G , MiceliA, ChiaramontiFet al. Sutureless aortic valve implantation through an upper v-type ministernotomy: an innovative approach in high-risk patients. Innovations 8(1), 23–28(2013).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• D‘Onofrio A , MessinaA, LorussoRet al. Sutureless aortic valve replacement as an alternative treatment for patients belonging to the ‘gray zone’ between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and conventional surgery: a propensity-matched, multicenter analysis. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 144(5), 1010–1016(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vasques F , MessoriA, LucenteforteE, BiancariF. Immediate and late outcome of patients aged 80 years and older undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 48 studies. Am. Heart J.163(3), 477–485(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolh P , LahayeL, GerardP, LimetR. Aortic valve replacement in the octogenarians: perioperative outcome and clinical follow-up. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg.16(1), 68–73(1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kodali SK , WilliamsMR, SmithCRet al. Two-year outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement. N. Engl. J. Med. 366(18), 1686–1695(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shan L , SaxenaA, McmahonR, WilsonA, NewcombA. A systematic review on the quality of life benefits after aortic valve replacement in the elderly. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.145(5), 1173–1189(2013).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan JM , EdwardsFH, ZhaoYet al. Long-term survival after aortic valve replacement among high-risk elderly patients in the United States: insights from the society of thoracic surgeons adult cardiac surgery database, 1991 to 2007. Circulation 126(13), 1621–1629(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Dor I , PichardAD, SatlerLFet al. Complications and outcome of balloon aortic valvuloplasty in high-risk or inoperable patients. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 3(11), 1150–1156(2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamid T , EichhoferJ, ClarkeB, MahadevanVS. Aortic balloon valvuloplasty: is there still a role in high-risk patients in the era of percutaneous aortic valve replacement? J. Int. Cardiol.23(4), 358–361(2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ussia GP , CapodannoD, BarbantiMet al. Balloon aortic valvuloplasty for severe aortic stenosis as a bridge to high-risk transcatheter aortic valve implantation. J. Invasive Cardiol. 22(4), 161–166(2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N. Engl. J. Med.363(17), 1597–1607(2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith CR , LeonMB, MackMJet al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N. Engl. J. Med. 364(23), 2187–2198(2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thourani VH , GunterRL, NeravetlaSet al. Use of transaortic, transapical, and transcarotid transcatheter aortic valve replacement in inoperable patients. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 96(4), 1349–1357(2013).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caceres M , BraudR, RoselliEE. The axillary/subclavian artery access route for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a systematic review of the literature. Ann. Thorac. Surg.93(3), 1013–1018(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chieffo A , BuchananGL, Van Mieghem NM et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the Edwards SAPIEN versus the Medtronic CoreValve revalving system devices: a multicenter collaborative study: the PRAGMATIC plus initiative (Pooled-RotterdAm-Milano-Toulouse In Collaboration). J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.61(8), 830–836(2013).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds MR , MagnusonEA, LeiYet al. Cost–effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: results of the PARTNER (Placement of aortic transcatheter valves) trial (Cohort A). J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 60(25), 2683–2692(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds MR , MagnusonEA, WangKet al. Cost–effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with standard care among inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis: results from the placement of aortic transcatheter valves (PARTNER) trial (Cohort B). Circulation 125(9), 1102–1109(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krane M , DeutschMA, BleizifferSet al. Quality of life among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Am. Heart J. 160(3), 451–457(2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Georgiadou P , KontodimaP, SbarouniEet al. Long-term quality of life improvement after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Am. Heart J. 162(2), 232–237(2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bekeredjian R , KrumsdorfU, ChorianopoulosEet al. Usefulness of percutaneous aortic valve implantation to improve quality of life in patients >80 years of age. Am. J. Cardiol. 106(12), 1777–1781(2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basraon J , ChandrashekharYS, JohnRet al. Comparison of risk scores to estimate perioperative mortality in aortic valve replacement surgery. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 92(2), 535–540(2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Dor I , GagliaMA, BarbashIMet al. Comparison between society of thoracic surgeons score and logistic EuroSCORE for predicting mortality in patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Cardiovasc. Revasc. Med. Incl. Mol. Interv. 12(6), 345–349(2011).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dewey TM, Brown DL, Das TS et al. High-risk patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: management and outcomes. Ann. Thorac. Surg.86(5), 1450–1456, discussion 1456–1457 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemmann K , SirotinaM, De Rosa S et al. The STS score is the strongest predictor of long-term survival following transcatheter aortic valve implantation, whereas access route (transapical versus transfemoral) has no predictive value beyond the periprocedural phase. Interact. Cardiovasc. Thorac. Surg.17(2), 359–364(2013).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nissinen J , BiancariF, WistbackaJOet al. Is it possible to improve the accuracy of EuroSCORE? Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 36(5), 799–804(2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D‘Ascenzo F , BalloccaF, MorettiCet al. Inaccuracy of available surgical risk scores to predict outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J. Cardiovasc. Med. doi:10.2459/JCM.0b013e3283638e26 (2013) (Epub ahead of print).
   Google Scholar
• Ranucci M , CastelvecchioS, MenicantiL, FrigiolaA, PelisseroG. Risk of assessing mortality risk in elective cardiac operations: age, creatinine, ejection fraction, and the law of parsimony. Circulation119(24), 3053–3061(2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green P , WoglomAE, GenereuxPet al. The impact of frailty status on survival after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in older adults with severe aortic stenosis: a single-center experience. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 5(9), 974–981(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buellesfeld L , WenaweserP, GerckensUet al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: predictors of procedural success – the siegburg-bern experience. Eur. Heart J. 31(8), 984–991(2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green P , CohenDJ, GenereuxPet al. Relation between six-minute walk test performance and outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (from the PARTNER Trial). Am. J. Cardiol. 112(5), 700–706(2013).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stortecky S , SchoenenbergerAW, MoserAet al. Evaluation of multidimensional geriatric assessment as a predictor of mortality and cardiovascular events after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 5(5), 489–496(2012).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoenenberger AW , StorteckyS, NeumannSet al. Predictors of functional decline in elderly patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Eur. Heart J. 34(9), 684–692(2013).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leon MB . A randomized evaluation of the SAPIEN XT transcatheter valve system in patients with aortic stenosis who are not candidates for surgery: PARTNER II, inoperable cohort. Presented at: 2013 American College of Cardiology. San Francisco, CA, USA, 9–11 March 2013.
   Google Scholar

Websites

• Aortic Stenosis and PhosphodiEsterase Type 5 iNhibition (ASPEN): a pilot study. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01275339 (Accessed 29October2013)
   Google Scholar
• The PARTNER II Trial: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valves (2011). www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT01314313 (Accessed 31May2013)
   Google Scholar
• Safety and Efficacy Study of the Medtronic CoreValve® System in the Treatment of Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis in High Risk and Very High Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement. www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT01240902 (Accessed 31May2013)
   Google Scholar