Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 519

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Outcome of Watchful Waiting in Asymptomatic Severe Mitral Regurgitation

Rosenhek, Raphael, Rader, Florian, Klaar, Ursula, Gabriel, Harald, Krejc, Marcel, Kalbeck, Daniel, Schemper, Michael, Maurer, Gerald, Baumgartner, Helmut·2006·Circulation

Abstract

Background— The management of asymptomatic severe mitral regurgitation remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of a watchful waiting strategy in which patients are referred to surgery when symptoms occur or when asymptomatic patients develop left ventricular (LV) enlargement, LV dysfunction, pulmonary hypertension, or recurrent atrial fibrillation. Methods and Results— A total of 132 consecutive asymptomatic patients (age 55±15 years, 49 female) with severe degenerative mitral regurgitation (flail leaflet or valve prolapse) were prospectively followed up for 62±26 months. Patients underwent serial clinical and echocardiographic examinations and were referred for surgery when the criteria mentioned above were fulfilled. Overall survival was not statistically different from expected survival either in the total group or in the subgroup of patients with flail leaflet. Eight deaths were observed. Thirty-eight patients developed criteria for surgery (symptoms, 24; LV criteria, 9; pulmonary hypertension or atrial fibrillation, 5). Survival free of any indication for surgery was 92±2% at 2 years, 78±4% at 4 years, 65±5% at 6 years, and 55±6% at 8 years. Patients with flail leaflet tended to develop criteria for surgery slightly but not significantly earlier. There was no operative mortality. Postoperative outcome was good with regard to survival, symptomatic status, and postoperative LV function. Conclusions— Asymptomatic patients with severe degenerative mitral regurgitation can be safely followed up until either symptoms occur or currently recommended cutoff values for LV size, LV function, or pulmonary hypertension are reached. This management strategy is associated with good perioperative and postoperative outcome but requires careful follow-up.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.105.599175

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.

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

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

See all 519

Metadata

Authors
Rosenhek, R., Rader, F., Klaar, U., Gabriel, H., Krejc, M., Kalbeck, D., Schemper, M., Maurer, G., & Baumgartner, H.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2006-05-09
Volume
113
Issue
18
Pages
2238-2244
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2120536963
Cited by
519
References
0
FWCI
22.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Outcome of Watchful Waiting in Asymptomatic Severe Mitral Regurgitation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.105.599175
The paper
Rosenhek, R., Rader, F., Klaar, U., Gabriel, H., Krejc, M., Kalbeck, D., Schemper, M., Maurer, G., & Baumgartner, H. (2006). Outcome of Watchful Waiting in Asymptomatic Severe Mitral Regurgitation. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.105.599175

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.