ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2023
Aortic Regurgitation: Review of the Diagnostic Criteria and the Management Guidelines.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for the treatment of pure severe native aortic valve regurgitation: a single-arm meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Myocardial remodelling in aortic regurgitation: time to think beyond volumes and function?European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence-enhanced electrocardiography to predict regurgitant valvular heart diseases: an international study.European heart journal · 2025Article
- Global, Regional, and National Burden of Non-Rheumatic Valvular Heart Diseases in Women: A Systematic Analysis of Global Burden of Disease 1990-2021.Global heart · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe evaluation of aortic regurgitation (AR) has advanced from physical examination and angiography towards evidence based non-invasive quantitative methods, primarily with echocardiography and more recently with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). This review highlights the guidelines and recent evidence in the diagnosis and management of AR; and outlines future areas of research. RECENT
findingsContemporary large cohorts of AR patients studied with echocardiography and CMR suggest that the left ventricular remodeling and systolic function triggers for intervention may be lower than previously recommended in the guidelines and emphasize the importance of LV volumes in risk stratification. Important gaps of knowledge in the quantitation of AR severity and patient risk stratification were fulfilled recently. Potential thresholds for intervention using ventricular volumes and CMR quantitative findings were recently described. The criteria for what constitutes hemodynamically significant AR and the optimal timing of intervention AR deserve further study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37715804What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.