Clinical journey for patients with aortic regurgitation: A retrospective observational study from a multicenter database

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundData using real‐world assessments of aortic regurgitation (AR) severity to identify rates of Heart Valve Team evaluation and aortic valve replacement (AVR), as well as mortality among untreated patients, are lacking. The present study assessed these trends in care and outcomes for real‐world patients with documented AR.MethodsUsing a deidentified data set (January 2018–March 2023) representing 1,002,853 patients >18 years of age from 25 US institutions participating in the egnite Database (egnite, Inc.) with appropriate permissions, patients were classified by AR severity in echocardiographic reports. Rates of evaluation by the Heart Valve Team, AVR, and all‐cause mortality without AVR were examined using Kaplan–Meier estimates and compared using the log‐rank test.ResultsWithin the data set, 845,113 patients had AR severity documented. For moderate‐to‐severe or severe AR, respectively, 2‐year rates (95% confidence interval) of evaluation by the Heart Valve Team (43.5% [41.7%–45.3%] and 65.4% [63.3%–67.4%]) and AVR (19.4% [17.6%–21.1%] and 46.5% [44.2%–48.8%]) were low. Mortality at 2 years without AVR increased with greater AR severity, up to 20.7% for severe AR (p < 0.001). In exploratory analyses, 2‐year mortality for untreated patients with left ventricular end‐systolic dimension index > 25 mm/m2 was similar for moderate (34.3% [29.2%–39.1%]) and severe (37.2% [24.9%–47.5%]) AR.ConclusionsModerate or greater AR is associated with poor clinical outcomes among untreated patients at 2 years. Rates of Heart Valve Team evaluation and AVR were low for those with moderate or greater AR, suggesting that earlier referral to the Heart Valve Team could be beneficial.