Clinical events and echocardiographic lesion progression rate in subjects with mild or moderate aortic regurgitation.

Background: The rate of progression of aortic regurgitation (AR) is not well described. Current guidelines state that asymptomatic patients with mild AR should be followed up every 3­5 years and 1­2 yearly for moderate AR. This study describes the lesion and clinical based progression of mild and moderate AR in a population of patients undergoing systematic follow-up. Methods and results: 341 patients with either mild or moderate AR were included. The rates of clinical events (death, aortic valve replacement and cardiac hospitalization) and progression of AR are reported. 341 patients were included; mean age was 71.1 years (IQR 66­80 years) and the median follow-up period was 4.6 (IQR 2­6.7) years. 292 patients did not have any events during follow-up. 3 patients required aortic valve replacement (2 of these due to severe aortic stenosis and 1 due to severe mitral regurgitation and co-existent moderate AR). 44 patients required cardiac hospitalization. 9 patients died during follow-up and 35 patients (10%) showed a progression of AR during follow-up with an average time of 4.0 ± 2.6 years. 8 patients (2.3% of the total) progressed to severe AR. Patients with mixed valvular pathology showed a greater increase in AR progression (27 (15%) vs 8 (5%); P = 0.004). Conclusions: Over medium term systematic follow-up progression and clinical events in patients with AR is rare, regardless of etiology. Patients who suffered from AR as an isolated valve pathology were less likely to show AR progression over time.

The case for a specialist multidisciplinary valve clinic.

Valve disease is common and is increasing in prevalence as the population ages. The delivery of appropriate management is not always straightforward, and better ways of organizing care are required. Here, the argument is made for a specialist multidisciplinary valve clinic, while a description is provided of the authors' model clinic, which incorporates a specialist cardiologist in addition to sonographers and a nurse who carry out the surveillance services. The clinic is based at a cardiothoracic center and one district hospital, but could be generalized. Previous audits have shown that this model can reduce the number of patients seen by a cardiologist, thus improving the safety and quality of treatment compared to conventional clinics.

A cardiac sonographer led follow up clinic for heart valve disease.

INTRODUCTION: This study describes the effect of introducing a cardiac sonographer led follow up clinic for patients with stable heart valve disease. The 2 years before and after the instigation of the valve clinic were audited. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The clinic was conducted in a single centre and undertaken in the cardiology department of a district general hospital. 382 patients, with 397 clinically significant valve lesions, but for whom surgery was not yet indicated but follow up required, were seen in a cardiac sonographer run clinics. These patients no longer attended a medical follow up clinic unless there was clinical or echocardiographic deterioration. Effectiveness was judged by the percentage treated according to current best practice guidelines, the number of echocardiograms performed and the number of hospital out patient visits attended. In addition mortality data for the subjects in the clinic was collected. RESULTS: The proportion followed up according to best practice guidelines rose from 157 (41%) to 354 (92%) (p<0.01). The total number of echocardiograms performed fell from 807 to 550. Total number of out patient visits fell from 998 to 31. 11 patients died in the two year study period, none from progressive valve disease. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates that a protocol driven sonographer led heart valve disease follow up clinic, significantly improved the quality of follow up while bringing about a major reduction in out patients visits, without compromising patient safety.