Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2000 Mar;23(3):141-7.
doi: 10.1002/clc.4960230303.

Aortic valve replacement for patients with mild to moderate aortic stenosis undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery

Affiliations
Review

Aortic valve replacement for patients with mild to moderate aortic stenosis undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery

T C Hilton. Clin Cardiol. 2000 Mar.

Abstract

Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is not normally recommended in asymptomatic patients, even if aortic stenosis is severe. However, as the population ages, an increasing number of patients with mild or moderate aortic stenosis will require coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). In these cases, risk of "prophylactic" AVR needs to be weighed against risks of subsequent worsening of the mildly or moderately diseased aortic valve. If unoperated, aortic stenosis will worsen at an average of 6-8 mmHg per year (-0.1 cm2/year valve area), and one-quarter of such patients will require late AVR with a high operative mortality (14-24%). If AVR is performed at the time of CABG, operative risk is increased only slightly (from 1-3% to 2-6%), as are late mortality (1-2% per year) and morbidity (1-2% per year), mainly from hemorrhagic complications. Intrinsic gradients of most prosthetic valves are sufficiently low that even patients with low aortic valve gradients are likely to derive hemodynamic benefit from AVR. Thus, if there is a measurable (>20-25 mmHg) gradient across the aortic valve in a patient who requires CABG, the patient is at considerable risk for developing symptomatic aortic stenosis prior to reaching the end of expected benefit from CABG; in this case AVR should be considered. It may be reasonable in patients with very mild gradients (<25 mmHg) to defer aortic valve surgery; however, it should be noted that aortic stenosis progression is generally more rapid when the initial gradient is small.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Schwartz F, Bauman P, Manthey J, Hoffman M, Schuler G, Mehmel HC, Schmidz W, Kubler W: The effect of aortic valve replacement on survival. Circulation 1982; 66: 1105–1110 - PubMed
    1. Pellikka PA, Nishimura RA, Bailey KR, Tajik AJ: The natural history of adults with asymptomatic, hemodynamically significant aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990; 15: 1012–1017 - PubMed
    1. Braunwald E: On natural history of severe aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990; 15: 1018–1020 - PubMed
    1. Collins JJ Jr, Aranki SF: Management of mild aortic stenosis during coronary artery bypass graft surgery. J Cardiol Surg 1994; 9 (suppl): 145–147 - PubMed
    1. Wong PS, Davies SW, Youhana A, Wright JE, Magee PG: Question to the editor: Coronary artery bypass surgery and minor aortic stenosis—to replace or not to replace? J Heart Valve Dis 1993; 2: 649–652 - PubMed