Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33826652›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Outcomes in asymptomatic, severe aortic stenosis.

Anette Borger Kvaslerud, Kenan Santic, Amjad Iqbal Hussain, Andreas Auensen, Arnt Fiane, Helge Skulstad, Lars Aaberge, Lars Gullestad, Kaspar Broch

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Advantages of Multiposition Scanning in Echocardiographic Assessment of the Severity of Discordant Aortic Stenosis.Pathophysiology : the official journal of the International Society for Pathophysiology · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anette Borger KvaslerudFaculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-9923-2685
Kenan SanticFaculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Amjad Iqbal HussainDepartment of Cardiology, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Norway.
Andreas AuensenFaculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Arnt FianeFaculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Helge SkulstadFaculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Lars AabergeDepartment of Cardiology, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Norway.
Lars GullestadFaculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Kaspar BrochDepartment of Cardiology, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Norway.
Oslo University Hospital · NOUniversity of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and aim of the studyPatients with asymptomatic, severe aortic stenosis are presumed to have a benign prognosis. In this retrospective cohort study, we examined the natural history of contemporary patients advised against aortic valve replacement due to a perceived lack of symptoms. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe reviewed the medical records of every patient given the ICD-10-code for aortic stenosis (I35.0) at Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, between Dec 1st, 2002 and Dec 31st, 2016. Patients who were evaluated by the heart team due to severe aortic stenosis were categorized by treatment strategy. We recorded baseline data, adverse events and survival for the patients characterized as asymptomatic and for 100 age and gender matched patients scheduled for aortic valve replacement.

resultsOf 2341 patients who were evaluated for aortic valve replacement due to severe aortic stenosis, 114 patients received conservative treatment due to a lack of symptoms. Asymptomatic patients had higher mortality than patients who had aortic valve replacement, log-rank p<0.001 (mean follow-up time: 4.0 (SD: 2.5) years). Survival at 1, 2 and 3 years for the asymptomatic patients was 88%, 75% and 63%, compared with 92%, 83% and 78% in the matched patients scheduled for aortic valve replacement. 28 (25%) of the asymptomatic patients had aortic valve replacement during follow-up. Age, previous history of coronary artery disease and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were predictors of mortality and coronary artery disease and NT-proBNP were predictors of 3-year morbidity in asymptomatic patients.

conclusionsIn this retrospective study, asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis who were advised against surgery had significantly higher mortality than patients who had aortic valve replacement.

Indexed as

Severity of Illness IndexAgedAged, 80 and overAortic Valve StenosisAsymptomatic DiseasesCase-Control StudiesFemaleHeart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationHumansMalePrognosisRetrospective StudiesSurvival Rate

Identifiers

PMID33826652
PMCPMC8026050
OpenAlexW3146010077

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.