Cited by 81Cardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsAortic Disease and Treatment ApproachesStreptococcal Infections and Treatments

Haemodynamic and anatomic progression of aortic stenosis

Open access
Nguyen, Virginia, Cimadevilla, Claire, Estellat, Candice, Codogno, Isabelle, Huart, Virginie, Benessiano, Joelle, Duval, Xavier, Pibarot, Philippe +4 more·2015·Heart

Abstract

Background: Aortic valve stenosis (AS) is a progressive disease, but the impact of baseline AS haemodynamic or anatomic severity on AS progression remains unclear. Methods: In 149 patients (104 mild AS, 36 moderate AS and 9 severe AS) enrolled in 2 ongoing prospective cohorts (COFRASA/GENERAC), we evaluated AS haemodynamic severity at baseline and yearly, thereafter, using echocardiography (mean pressure gradient (MPG)) and AS anatomic severity using CT (degree of aortic valve calcification (AVC)). Results: After a mean follow-up of 2.9±1.0 years, mean MGP increased from 22±11 to 30±16 mm Hg (+3±3 mm Hg/year), and mean AVC from 1108±891 to 1640±1251 AU (arbitrary units) (+188±176 AU/year). Progression of AS was strongly related to baseline haemodynamic severity (+2±3 mm Hg/year in mild AS, +4±3 mm Hg/year in moderate AS and +5±5 mm Hg/year in severe AS (p=0.01)), and baseline haemodynamic severity was an independent predictor of haemodynamic progression (p=0.0003). Annualised haemodynamic and anatomic progression rates were significantly correlated (r=0.55, p<0.0001), but AVC progression rate was also significantly associated with baseline haemodynamic severity (+141±133 AU/year in mild AS, +279±189 AU/year in moderate AS and +361±293 AU/year in severe AS, p<0.0001), and both baseline MPG and baseline AVC were independent determinants of AVC progression (p<0.0001). Conclusions: AS progressed faster with increasing haemodynamic or anatomic severity. Our results suggest that a medical strategy aimed at preventing AVC progression may be useful in all subsets of patients with AS including those with severe AS and support the recommended closer follow-up of patients with AS as AS severity increases. Clinical trial registration: COFRASA (clinicalTrial.gov number NCT 00338676) and GENERAC (clinicalTrial.gov number NCT00647088 ).

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/heartjnl-2014-307154

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Prior studies have demonstrated that CT-calcium scoring is a robust and reproducible imaging technique, with excellent diagnostic accuracy for identifying severe aortic stenosis.

    “Prior studies have demonstrated that CT‐calcium scoring is a robust and reproducible imaging technique, with excellent diagnostic accuracy for identifying severe AS. 10 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 25 , 26”

    From Grading of Aortic Valve Calcification Severity and Risk Stratification in Aortic Stenosis (2024) · cites this paper as [11]

    The MSCT measurements section (page unavailable) says CT assessment of aortic-valve calcification is accurate and reproducible, and reports low observer variability. The Introduction describes calcium scoring as complementary for assessing stenosis severity, but the paper does not establish excellent diagnostic accuracy for identifying severe aortic stenosis specifically. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Rajamannan NM, Evans FJ, Aikawa E, et al. National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Working Group on Calcific Aotic Stenosis. 2010. http:// wwwnhlbinihgov/meetings/workshops/cashtm

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nguyen, V., Cimadevilla, C., Estellat, C., Codogno, I., Huart, V., Benessiano, J., Duval, X., Pibarot, P., Clavel, M. A., Enriquez-Sarano, M., Vahanian, A., & Messika-Zeitoun, D.
Affiliations
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (FR)
  • Centre de Ressources Biologique, Assistance Publique—Hôpitaux de Paris, Bichat Hospital, Paris, France
  • Department of Medicine, Québec Heart and Lung Institute, Laval University, Québec city, Québec, Canada
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Department of Cardiology, Assistance Publique—Hôpitaux de Paris, Bichat Hospital, Paris, France
Venue
Heart
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2015-02-05
Volume
101
Issue
12
Pages
943-947
ISSN
  • 1355-6037 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-201X
OpenAlex
W1986785505
Cited by
81
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 5
FWCI
7.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Heart (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Corpus Université Laval (Université Laval) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Paris
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Aortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Streptococcal Infections and Treatments
Keywords
aortic stenosis, disease progression, mean pressure gradient, aortic valve calcification, follow-up interval
MeSH terms
Aged, Aortic Valve, Aortic Valve Stenosis, Blood Pressure, Calcinosis, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Hemodynamics, Humans, Male, Severity of Illness Index, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Echocardiography, Doppler, Disease Progression

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