This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Joel Dunning Permission Requests Google Scholar Articles by Subramanian, H. Articles by Dunning, J. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Subramanian, H. Articles by Dunning, J. Related Collections Education Valve disease

Is it ever worth contemplating an aortic valve replacement on patients with low gradient severe aortic stenosis but poor left ventricular function with no contractile reserve?

^a Department of Cardiology, Hahneman University Hospital, Philadelphia, USA
^b Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK

*Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +44 780 1548122.

E-mail address: joeldunning{at}doctors.org.uk (J. Dunning), hsubrama{at}DrexelMed.edu (H. Subramanian).

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether it is worth performing aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis and poor left ventricular function but no contractile reserve on dobutamine stress testing. Altogether 251 papers were identified using the below mentioned search and all major international guidelines were included. Fourteen presented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The author, journal, date and country of publication, patient group, relevant outcomes and weaknesses were tabulated. We conclude that patients with severe aortic stenosis and a contractile reserve of <20% improvement in stroke volume on dobutamine stress testing have a very poor prognosis of only 10–20% at two years. Heart transplant would offer the best chance of survival to those eligible but for those not eligible, a surgical option should not be discounted for selected patients. The American Heart Association guidelines state that prognosis is very poor for either medical or surgical treatment, but the European Society of Cardiology guidelines state that surgery can be performed in these patients but should take into account the clinical condition of the patient. The operative mortality is around 30% and the French Multicentre study on low gradient aortic stenosis has shown that if the patient survives there is likely to be an improvement in symptoms and ejection fraction. Thus, absence of contractile reserve on stress testing does not exclude myocardial recovery after surgery, although it is a strong predictor for operative mortality. It should be noted that surgery has only been reported in very few of these patients to date. B-natriuretic peptide has also been suggested as a further marker of better prognosis in these high-risk patients in one small study.

Key Words: Evidence-based medicine; Aortic valve stenosis; Congestive heart failure; Thoracic surgery