Unique Aspects of Women's Valvular Heart Diseases: Impact for Diagnosis and Treatment.

Valvular heart diseases (VHDs) are a major cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality worldwide. As degenerative and functional mechanisms represent the main etiologies in high-income countries are degenerative and functional, while in low income countries etiologie is mostly rheumatic. Although therapeutic options have evolved considerably in recent years, women are consistently diagnosed at later stages of their disease, are delayed in receiving surgical referrals, and exhibit worse postoperative outcomes, compared to men. This difference is a result of the historical underrepresentation of women in studies from which current guidelines were developed. However, in recent years, important research, including more female patients, has been conducted and has highlighted substantial sex-specific differences in the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of VHDs. Systematic consideration of these sex-specific differences in VHD patients is crucial for providing equitable healthcare and optimizing clinical outcomes in both female and male patients. Hence, this review aims to explore implications of sex-specific particularities for diagnosis, treatment options, and outcomes in women with VHDs.

Les valvulopathies sont une cause majeure de morbidité cardiovasculaire et de mortalité dans le monde. Les mécanismes dégénératifs et fonctionnels représentent maintenant les principales étiologies dans les pays à revenu élevé, mais la maladie valvulaire rhumatismale demeure très prévalente dans les pays à revenu faible. Par ailleurs, même si les options thérapeutiques ont évolué depuis quelques années, les femmes reçoivent systématiquement leur diagnostic à des stades plus avancés de la maladie, sont orientées plus tard en chirurgie et les issues postopératoires sont moins favorables par rapport aux hommes. Cette différence s'explique par une sous-représentation historique des femmes dans les études sur lesquelles reposent les lignes directrices actuelles. Cependant, des études importantes réalisées ces dernières années ont mis au jour des différences substantielles entre les sexes en ce qui a trait à l'étiologie, au diagnostic et au traitement des valvulopathies. Il est essentiel de tenir compte des différences selon le sexe chez les patients atteints d'une valvulopathie pour fournir des soins de santé équitables et optimiser l'issue clinique tant chez les femmes que chez les hommes. Cette analyse vise donc à explorer les implications des particularités selon le sexe en ce qui concerne le diagnostic, les options thérapeutiques et les issues chez les femmes atteintes de valvulopathies.

Prevalence and Outcomes of Patients With Discordant High-Gradient Aortic Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Conflicting prognostic results have been reported in patients with discordant high-gradient aortic stenosis ([DHG-AS] the combination of a mean pressure gradient ≥40 mm Hg and an aortic valve area [AVA] >1 cm2). Moreover, existing studies only included selected patients without concomitant aortic regurgitation. OBJECTIVES: The authors assessed the prevalence and survival of patients presenting with DHG-AS in an unselected group of consecutive patients presenting to the echocardiography laboratory of a tertiary referral center. METHODS: A total of 3,547 adult patients with AVA ≤1.5 cm2 and peak aortic jet velocity ≥2.5 m/s or mean gradient ≥25 mm Hg who presented between 2005 and 2015 were included. Baseline clinical and echocardiographic data, and, when available, aortic valve calcium (AVC) score were collected in an institutional database, with subsequent retrospective analysis. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality during follow-up. RESULTS: DHG-AS was observed in 163 patients (11.6% of patients with a high gradient). After adjustment for potential confounders, overall mortality rate of patients with DHG-AS was similar to that of patients with concordant severe aortic stenosis (HR: 0.98 [95% CI: 0.66-1.44]; P = 0.91), and patients with discordant low-gradient aortic stenosis (HR: 0.85 [95% CI: 0.58-1.26]; P = 0.42), and higher than concordant moderate aortic stenosis (HR: 0.54 [95% CI: 0.36-0.81]; P = 0.003). After adjustment for aortic velocities, aortic regurgitation had no significant impact on survival. AVC was higher than in patients with concordant moderate aortic stenosis and discordant low-gradient aortic stenosis, and not significantly different from that of concordant severe aortic stenosis. CONCLUSIONS: DHG-AS is not uncommon. Whereas AVA >1.0 cm2 is often seen as moderate aortic stenosis, a high-pressure gradient conveys a poor prognosis, whatever the AVA and the severity of concomitant aortic regurgitation.

Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers Are Associated With Reduced Valvular Fibrosis in Women With Aortic Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) may slow down the progression of aortic stenosis (AS) through their antifibrotic effect. Women present more valvular fibrosis than men, so ARBs may have more effect in females. Our aim was to assess the impact of ARBs on the remodelling of the aortic valve in men and women. METHODS: We included patients who had an aortic valve replacement with or without coronary bypass grafting from 2006 to 2013. Patients with missing echocardiographic or histologic data were excluded. Warren-Yong and fibrosis scores of the explanted valves were performed. Patients were divided into 4 phenotypes according to their Warren-Yong and fibrosis scores: mild calcification/fibrosis, severe calcification/fibrosis group, predominant fibrosis group, predominant calcification group. RESULTS: Among the 1321 included patients, the vast majority (89%) has severe AS. Patients in the predominant fibrosis group, compared with the predominant calcium group, were more often female (39% vs 31%; P = 0.008) with bicuspid valves (44% vs 34%; P = 0.002), and less often used ARBs (25% vs 30%; P = 0.046). Female sex was independently associated with being in the predominant fibrosis group (odds ratio 1.45, 95% confidence interval 1.08-1.95; P = 0.01), with a significant interaction between female sex and ARBs. Women taking ARBs compared with women not taking ARBs had significantly lower fibrosis scores (P < 0.001). This difference was not seen in men. CONCLUSIONS: In this large series of patients with moderate-severe AS, among the women there was a negative association between intake of ARBs and valvular fibrosis. Thus, the possible effects of ARBs may be sex specific, with a larger therapeutic role in women.