The DOI matches its Crossref record.
To operate or not on elderly patients with aortic stenosis: the decision and its consequences
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the application of guidelines in the decision making process leading to medical or surgical treatment for aortic stenosis in elderly patients. DESIGN: Cohort analysis based on a prospective inclusive registry. SETTING: 205 consecutive patients (>/= 70 years) with clinically relevant isolated aortic stenosis and without serious comorbidity, seen for the first time in the Doppler-echocardiographic laboratories of three university hospitals in the Netherlands. RESULTS: The initial choice was surgery in 94 patients and medical treatment in 111. Only 59% of the patients who should have had valve replacement according to the practice guidelines were actually offered surgical treatment. These were mainly symptomatic patients under 80 years of age with a high gradient. Operative mortality (30 days) was only 2%. The three year survival was 80% in the surgical group (17 deaths among 94 patients) and 49% in the medical group (43/111). Multivariate analysis showed that only patients with a high baseline risk, mainly determined by impaired left ventricular function, had a significantly better three year survival with surgical treatment than with medical treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In daily practice, elderly patients with clinically relevant symptomatic aortic stenosis are often denied surgical treatment. This study indicates that a surgical approach, especially where there is impaired systolic left ventricular function, is associated with better survival.
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
Cited by
Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation for Aortic Stenosis in Patients Who Cannot Undergo Surgery
Leon, M. B., Smith, C. R., Mack, M., Miller, D. C., Moses, J. W., Svensson, L. G., Tuzcu, E. M., Webb, J. G., Fontana, G. P., Makkar, R. R., et al. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1008232 · Cited by 7,205
Transcatheter versus Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in High-Risk Patients
Smith, C. R., Leon, M. B., Mack, M. J., Miller, D. C., Moses, J. W., Svensson, L. G., Tuzcu, E. M., Webb, J. G., Fontana, G. P., Makkar, R. R., et al. (2011) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1103510 · Cited by 6,345
Iung, B. (2003) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1016/s0195-668x(03)00201-x · Cited by 3,530
Decision-making in elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis: why are so many denied surgery?
Iung, B., Cachier, A., Baron, G., Messika-Zeitoun, D., Delahaye, F., Tornos, P., Gohlke-Bärwolf, C., Boersma, E., Ravaud, P., & Vahanian, A. (2005) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehi471 · Cited by 1,108
Bach, D. S., Siao, D., Girard, S. E., Duvernoy, C., McCallister, B. D., & Gualano, S. K. (2009) · Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · doi:10.1161/circoutcomes.109.848259 · Cited by 327
Metadata
- Authors
- Bouma, B. J., van den Brink, R. B. A., van der Meulen, J. H. P., Verheul, H. A., Cheriex, E. C., Hamer, H. P. M., Dekker, E., Lie, K. I., & Tijssen, J. G. P.
- Venue
- Heart
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1999-08-01
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 143-148
- ISSN
- 1355-6037 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2113546360
- Cited by
- 340
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.07
- 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: To operate or not on elderly patients with aortic stenosis: the decision and its consequences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/hrt.82.2.143
- The paper
- Bouma, B. J., van den Brink, R. B. A., van der Meulen, J. H. P., Verheul, H. A., Cheriex, E. C., Hamer, H. P. M., Dekker, E., Lie, K. I., & Tijssen, J. G. P. (1999). To operate or not on elderly patients with aortic stenosis: the decision and its consequences. Heart. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.82.2.143
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.