1979
DOI: 10.1378/chest.76.4.391
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Progression of Aortic Stenosis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
9
0

Year Published

1982
1982
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 100 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These observations had been reported by other investigations [24][25][26] Otto and al [27] found that 75% of patients with mild AS develop symptoms 5 years after mitral valve surgery.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…These observations had been reported by other investigations [24][25][26] Otto and al [27] found that 75% of patients with mild AS develop symptoms 5 years after mitral valve surgery.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…So far, all reports on serial assessment of aortic valve function have focused on patients with established aortic valve stenosis ; no studies in unselected elderly individuals exist for comparison. The earliest follow-up investigations were based on repeated cardiac catheterizations [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] and showed a progressive reduction of aortic valve area ranging from 0n02 to 0n3 cm# per year on average. However, the study groups were small, from 11 to maximally 65 patients, and with mean ages from 37 to 61 years, much younger than ours.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From our 16 patients with increased AVG, the average rate of progression of the aortic gradient was 10.3 mm Hg/year, but it was quite variable and unpredictable. Bogart et a1 [15], and Cheitlin et al [16], reported a similar variability of progression of AVG. The pronounced delay of upstroke time may well suggest the increasing AVG as other investigators [6,7,10] have experienced, but it was not helpful in some cases and the magnitude of the delay of upstroke time did not correlate with the change of AVG.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Various noninvasive techniques such as the degree of valve calcification [6, 71, electrovectorcardiography [8,9, 141, phonocardiographic parameters [6,7, lo], echocardiography [ll-131, and kinetocardiography [7] have been utilized to assess the severity of aortic stenosis, but none of these provides a definite guide for determining the transvalvular aortic gradient. The serial measurements of aortic valvular gradients (AVG) by catheterization in adult patients were recently reported by several authors [15][16], but to our knowledge the serial evaluation of left ventricular function has not been reported, although Kennedy et a1 [17] and Liedtke et a1 [18] demonstrated the impaired left ventricular function in patients with aortic stenosis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%