SynthesisOpen heart2026
Prognostic significance implications of aortic valve sclerosis in the development of aortic stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Open heart, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFibrocalcific aortic valve sclerosis (AVSc), the earliest manifestation of aortic stenosis (AS), is increasingly recognised as a marker of systemic vascular damage and adverse cardiovascular outcomes. While a subset of AVSc patients progresses to AS, reported rates vary widely. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to better define the natural history of AVSc progression.
methodsFollowing Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science through July 2025 for observational studies reporting AS development in AVSc patients. Primary outcomes were progression to any degree of AS and to severe AS. Pooled event rates were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed using standard statistical methods. Meta-regression explored associations with clinical and demographic variables.
resultsEight studies (n=12 388 patients) reported on the progression of AVSc patients to any AS stage, and nine studies (n=19 486 patients) on the progression to severe AS. Over a median follow-up of 4.0 years, 14.1% of AVSc patients progressed to any AS stage (effect size: 0.14; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.53), and 2.0% to severe AS (effect size: 0.02; 95% CI 0.003 to 0.094). Heterogeneity was high, but no publication bias was detected. Meta-regression found no significant predictors of progression.
conclusionsApproximately one in six AVSc patients progresses to AS within 4 years, and 2% develop a severe disease. These findings underscore the importance of structured echocardiographic surveillance and support AVSc as a clinically relevant marker of systemic cardiovascular risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.