Search

Contemporary outcomes for aortic stenosis (AS) and the association between physician-assessed AS severity and quantitative parameters is poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate AS natural history, compare outcomes for physicians' AS assessment vs. quantitative parameters, and identify AS parameters with the most explanatory power. We ascertained physician-assessed AS severity, echocardiographic parameters, and clinical data for 546,769 patients from 2008-2018, examined multivariable associations of physician-assessed AS severity and number of quantitative severe AS parameters with death, cardiovascular hospitalization, and aortic valve replacement, and estimated the relative contribution of different quantitative AS parameters on outcomes. Among 49,604 AS patients (mean [SD] age 77 [11] years), 17.6% had moderate, 3.6% moderate-severe, and 9.4% severe AS. During median 3.7 [IQR 1.7-6.8] years, physician-assessed AS severity strongly correlated with outcomes, with moderate AS patients tracking closest to mild AS, and moderate-to-severe AS patients more comparable to severe AS. Although the number of quantitative severe AS parameters strongly predicted outcomes (adjusted HR [95% CI] for death 1.40 [1.34-1.46], 1.70 [1.56-1.85], and 1.78 [1.63-1.94] for 1, 2, and 3 parameters, respectively), aortic valve area <1.0 cm2 was the most frequent severe AS parameter, explained the largest relative contribution (67%), and was common in patients classified as moderate (21%) or moderate-severe (56%) AS. Physician-assessed AS severity predicts outcomes, with cumulative effects for each severe AS parameter. Moderate AS includes a wide spectrum of patients, with discordant AVA <1.0 cm2 being both common and predictive. Better identification of non-classical severe AS phenotypes may improve outcomes. Long-term survival for patients with physician-assessed aortic stenosis (AS) severity and discrepancy between physician-assessed AS severity and quantitative severe AS parameters Caption: Patients with increasing physician-assessed AS severity had worse long-term survival, but outcomes for patients identified as "moderate" AS were most similar to those with "mild" AS, and those categorized as "moderate-severe" by physicians had outcomes between "moderate" and "severe" AS patients. Many patients with moderate or moderate-severe AS had at least 1 quantitative severe AS parameter, which was most often aortic valve area (AVA) <1.0 cm2. If these patients were misclassified low-flow severe AS patients, this would only bias outcomes for moderate and moderate-severe AS patients toward severe AS in our cohort, making the true difference between moderate and severe AS patients even larger. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The approved use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for aortic stenosis has expanded substantially over time. However, gaps remain with respect to accurately delineating risk for poor clinical and patient-centered outcomes. Our objective was to develop prediction models for 30-day clinical and patient-centered outcomes after TAVR within a large, diverse community-based population.Methods: We identified all adults who underwent TAVR between 2013-2019 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, an integrated healthcare delivery system, and were monitored for the following 30-day outcomes: all-cause death, improvement in quality of life, all-cause hospitalizations, all-cause emergency department (ED) visits, heart failure (HF)-related hospitalizations, and HF-related ED visits. We developed prediction models using gradient boosting machines using linked demographic, clinical and other data from the Society for Thoracic Surgeons (STS)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) TVT Registry and electronic health records. We evaluated model performance using area under the curve (AUC) for model discrimination and associated calibration plots. We also evaluated the association of individual predictors with outcomes using logistic regression for quality of life and Cox proportional hazards regression for all other outcomes.Results: We identified 1,565 eligible patients who received TAVR. The risks of adverse 30-day post-TAVR outcomes ranged from 1.3% (HF hospitalizations) to 15.3% (all-cause ED visits). In models with the highest discrimination, discrimination was only moderate for death (AUC 0.60) and quality of life (AUC 0.62), but better for HF-related ED visits (AUC 0.76). Calibration also varied for different outcomes. Importantly, STS risk score only independently predicted death and all-cause hospitalization but no other outcomes. Older age also only independently predicted HF-related ED visits, and race/ethnicity was not significantly associated with any outcomes.Conclusions: Despite using a combination of detailed STS/ACC TVT Registry and electronic health record data, predicting short-term clinical and patient-centered outcomes after TAVR remains challenging. More work is needed to identify more accurate predictors for post-TAVR outcomes to support personalized clinical decision making and monitoring strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Statin therapy is highly efficacious in the prevention of fatal and nonfatal atherosclerotic events in persons at increased cardiovascular risk. However, its long-term effectiveness in practice depends on a high level of medication adherence by patients.Methods: We identified nondiabetic adults with cardiovascular risk factors between 2008 and 2010 within a large integrated health care delivery system in Northern California. Through 2013, we examined the use and adherence of newly initiated statin therapy based on data from dispensed prescriptions from outpatient pharmacy databases.Results: Among 209,704 eligible adults, 68,085 (32.5%) initiated statin therapy during the follow-up period, with 90.4% receiving low-potency statins. At 12 and 24 months after initiating statins, 84.3% and 80.2%, respectively, were actively receiving statin therapy, but only 42% and 30%, respectively, had no gaps in treatment during those time periods. There was also minimal switching between statins or use of other lipid-lowering therapies for augmentation during follow-up. Age≥50 years, Asian/Pacific Islander race, Hispanic ethnicity, prior myocardial infarction, prior ischemic stroke, hypertension, and baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol>100 mg/dL were associated with higher adjusted odds, whereas female gender, black race, current smoking, dementia were associated with lower adjusted odds, of active statin treatment at 12 months after initiation.Conclusions: There remain opportunities for improving prevention in patients at risk for cardiovascular events. Our study identified certain patient subgroups that may benefit from interventions to enhance medication adherence, particularly by minimizing treatment gaps and discontinuation of statin therapy within the first year of treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]