Management errors in adults with congenital heart disease: prevalence, sources, and consequences.

Aims: Improved survival has resulted in increasing numbers and complexity of adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD). International guidelines recommend specialized care but many patients are still not managed at dedicated ACHD centres. This study analysed referral sources and appropriateness of management for patients referred to our tertiary ACHD Centre over the past 3 years. Methods and results: We compared differences in care between patients referred from paediatric/ACHD-trained vs. general adult cardiologists, according to Adherence (A) or Non-Adherence (NA) with published guidelines. Non-Adherent cases were graded according to the severity of adverse outcome or risk of adverse outcome. Of 309 consecutively referred patients (28 ± 14 years, 51% male), 134 (43%) were from general cardiologists (19% highly complex CHD) and 115 (37%) were from paediatric cardiology or ACHD specialists (33% highly complex CHD). Sixty referrals (20%) were from other medical teams and of those, 31 had been lost to follow-up. Guideline deviations were more common in referrals from general compared to CHD-trained cardiologists (P < 0.001). Of general cardiology referrals, 49 (37%) were NA; 18 had catastrophic or major complications (n = 2, 16 respectively). In contrast, only 12 (10%) of the paediatric/ACHD referrals were NA, but none of these were catastrophic and only 3 were major. Simple, moderate, and highly complex CHD patients were at increased risk of adverse outcome when not under specialized CHD cardiology care (P = 0.04, 0.009, and 0.002, respectively). Conclusion: Non-adherence with guidelines was common in the ACHD population, and this frequently resulted in important adverse clinical consequences. These problems were more likely in patients who had not been receiving specialized CHD care. Configuring healthcare systems to optimize 'whole of life' care for this growing population is essential.

Assessment of risk factors for developing incident aortic stenosis: the Tromsø Study.

To disclose risk factors of incident aortic stenosis (AS) and progression of established AS. A prospective cohort study. The Tromsø Study, a population based health survey. Over a 14 years span we performed three repeated echocardiographic examinations (1994, 2001 and 2008) of a random sample of initially 3,243 participants. Data from the only hospital serving this population were included in the follow up. Throughout the study 132 participants were diagnosed with incident AS, defined as mean aortic valve gradient ≥15 mmHg. Cox proportional hazards regression disclosed age (HR 1.11, 95 %CI 1.08-1.14), systolic blood pressure (BP) (HR 1.01, 95 % CI 1.00-1.02), active smoking (HR 1.71, 95 % CI 1.09-2.67), and waist circumference (HR 1.02, 95 % CI 1.00-1.03) as independent predictors of incident AS. Analysis of risk factors for progression of AS disclosed a higher mean aortic gradient at first measurement (p = 0.015), weight (p = 0.015), a low haemoglobin (Hgb) (p = 0.030) and high density lipoprotein (HDL) (p = 0.032) as significant independent predictors. Age, systolic BP, smoking and waist circumference were independent predictors of incident AS, whereas cholesterol was not. Mean aortic gradient at first measurement, weight, an elevated HDL and low Hgb increase the progression rate of the disease. Our data indicate that calcific aortic valve disease is a distinct pathophysiological process, with age, smoking and "wear and tear" of the valve being major contributors to the disease development.

Incidence of aortic stenosis in subjects with normal and slightly elevated aortic gradients and flow.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe the progression rate into manifest aortic stenosis (AS) in subjects with normal aortic valves or in an early phase of calcific aortic valve disease. METHODS: Participants were recruited from the Tromsø Study, a population-based health survey. In our prospective cohort study, we performed two echocardiographical examinations (2001 and 2008) of a random sample of 1884 participants. AS was defined as a mean aortic valve gradient ≥15 mm Hg or a peak flow exceeding 2.6 m/s. Those with lesser values were stratified into three groups based on mean gradients (cut-off 5 and 10 mm Hg) and peak aortic flow (cut-off 1.5 and 2 m/s). RESULTS: At baseline, 71 participants had gradients from 10 to 14.9 mm Hg, of whom 32.4% developed AS during follow-up. AS developed in only 3.6% of those with a baseline gradient of 5-9.9 mm Hg and in 0.3% of those with a gradient <5 mm Hg. Almost identical separations were obtained among the three flow velocity groups. Of the 45 subjects who developed incident AS, 56% acquired mild, 33% moderate and 11% severe AS. Their mean gradient progression rate was 2.7 mm Hg/year. CONCLUSIONS: The results support that subjects with a mean aortic valve gradient of 10-15 mm Hg or aortic flow >2.0 m/s should be followed routinely. This group identifies about half of those who develop AS in the following 7 years.

The evolving epidemiology of valvular aortic stenosis. the Tromsø study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess prevalence, incidence, prognosis and progression of degenerative valvular aortic stenosis (AS). SETTING: The Tromsø Study and the University Hospital of North Norway. DESIGN: Population based prospective study. POPULATION: Over a 14 year span we performed three repeated echocardiographic examinations (1994, 2001 and 2008) of a random sample of initially 3273 participants. Data from the only hospital serving this population were included. RESULTS: There were 164 subjects with AS. Prevalence consistently increased with age, average values being 0.2% in the 50-59 year cohort, 1.3% in the 60-69 year cohort, 3.9% in the 70-79 year cohort and 9.8% in the 80-89 year cohort. The incidence rate in the study was 4.9‰/year. The mean annual increase in mean transvalvular pressure gradient was 3.2 mm Hg. The increase was lower in mild AS than in more severe disease, disclosing a non-linear development of the gradient, but with large individual variations. Mortality was not significantly increased in the asymptomatic AS-group (HR = 1.28), nor in those who received aortic valve replacement (n = 34, HR = 0.93), compared with the general population. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to document the incidence and prognosis of AS in a general population with surgery as a treatment option. It reveals an accelerated progression of the aortic mean gradient as the disease advances. The prognosis of AS seems to be comparable with the normal population in the asymptomatic stage and after successful surgery, indicating that the follow-up and timing of surgery has been adequate for this patient group.