The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mild and moderate aortic stenosis Natural history and risk stratification by echocardiography
Open accessAbstract
AIMS: To define the natural history and predictors of outcome in mild and moderate aortic stenosis (AS). METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-six consecutive asymptomatic patients (73 women, age 58+/-19 years) with mild to moderate AS (jet velocity 2.5 to 3.9m/s) were followed for 48+/-19 months. Haemodynamic progression and clinical outcome was analysed. Event-free survival with end-points defined as death (n=34) or aortic valve surgery (n=33), was 95+/-2%, 75+/-3% and 60+/-5% at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively. Both, cardiac and non-cardiac mortality were significantly increased, resulting in a 1.8 times higher mortality than expected (P<0.005). By multivariate analysis, moderate to severe aortic valve calcification, coronary artery disease (CAD) and peak jet velocity were independent predictors of outcome. Event-free survival for patients with moderate or severe valve calcification was 92+/-4%, 61+/-7% and 42+/-7% at 1, 3 and 5 years versus 100%, 90+/-4% and 82+/-5% for patients with no or mild calcification. Patients with calcified aortic valves, CAD or with an event had a significantly faster haemodynamic progression. Of 129 patients with a follow-up echocardiographic exam, 59 (46%) developed severe stenosis during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Outcome of mild and moderate AS is worse than commonly assumed. Rapid progression and excess mortality have to be considered. Significant valve calcification, CAD and rapid progression of aortic jet velocity indicate poor outcome. Patients with these characteristics may require closer follow-up than generally assumed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Otto, C. M., Burwash, I. G., Legget, M. E., Munt, B. I., Fujioka, M., Healy, N. L., Kraft, C. D., Miyake-Hull, C. Y., & Schwaegler, R. G. (1997) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.95.9.2262 · Cited by 1,146
Cited by
Otto, C. M., Nishimura, R. A., Bonow, R. O., Carabello, B. A., Erwin, J. P., Gentile, F., Jneid, H., Krieger, E. V., Mack, M., McLeod, C., et al. (2021) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000923 · Cited by 3,686
2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease
Nishimura, R. A., Otto, C. M., Bonow, R. O., Carabello, B. A., Erwin, J. P., Guyton, R. A., O’Gara, P. T., Ruiz, C. E., Skubas, N. J., Sorajja, P., et al. (2014) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.02.536 · Cited by 3,523
Nishimura, R. A., Otto, C. M., Bonow, R. O., Carabello, B. A., Erwin, J. P., Guyton, R. A., O’Gara, P. T., Ruiz, C. E., Skubas, N. J., Sorajja, P., et al. (2014) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000029 · Cited by 2,566
Freeman, R. V., & Otto, C. M. (2005) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.104.486738 · Cited by 1,006
Echocardiographic assessment of valve stenosis: EAE/ASE recommendations for clinical practice
Baumgartner, H., Hung, J., Bermejo, J., Chambers, J. B., Evangelista, A., Griffin, B. P., Iung, B., Otto, C. M., Pellikka, P. A., & Quinones, M. (2009) · European Journal of Echocardiography · doi:10.1093/ejechocard/jen303 · Cited by 967
Metadata
- Authors
- Rosenhek, R.
- Venue
- European Heart Journal
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-02
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 199-205
- ISSN
- 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2266929541
- Cited by
- 461
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mild and moderate aortic stenosis Natural history and risk stratification by echocardiography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ehj.2003.12.002
- The paper
- Rosenhek, R. (2004). Mild and moderate aortic stenosis Natural history and risk stratification by echocardiography. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehj.2003.12.002
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.