Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 26, 2026

Standardized Technique of Aortic Valve Re-implantation for Valve-sparing Aortic Root Replacement
Published on: December 11, 2017
Aortic valve surgery and survival in patients with moderate or severe aortic stenosis and left ventricular
Zainab Samad1, Amit N Vora2, Allison Dunning3
1Division of Cardiology, Duke Medicine, Duke University, PO Box 3254, Rm 3347A Duke South, 200 Trent Drive, Durham, NC, USA zainab.samad@dm.duke.edu.
Insights
Aortic valve surgery (AVR) with or without coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) significantly improves survival in patients with moderate/severe aortic stenosis (AS) and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). This intervention offers better outcomes compared to medical therapy or CABG alone.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Cardiac Surgery
- Echocardiography
Background:
- Moderate/severe aortic stenosis (AS) with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) presents a significant mortality risk.
- Current treatment strategies and survival outcomes for this patient group require further investigation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine the frequency of aortic valve surgery (AVR) in patients with moderate/severe AS and LVSD.
- To evaluate the relationship between AVR (with or without CABG) and survival in this cohort.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of the Duke Echocardiographic Database (1995-2014) including 132,804 patients.
- Identification of 1634 patients with moderate/severe AS and LVSD based on echocardiographic criteria.
- Multivariable Cox models and inverse probability weighting were used to assess AVR's impact on all-cause mortality.
Main Results:
- AVR was performed in 26% of moderate AS and 48% of severe AS patients within 5 years.
- Overall, 53% of patients experienced mortality within 5 years post-index echocardiogram.
- AVR, with or without CABG, was associated with significantly lower 5-year mortality (HR=0.49) compared to medical therapy.
- CABG plus AVR showed superior survival compared to CABG alone (HR=0.18).
Conclusions:
- In patients with moderate/severe AS and LVSD, AVR with or without CABG is linked to improved survival.
- Further research is needed to understand practice patterns and the role of transcatheter approaches in this high-risk population.
Aims:
We aimed to determine the frequency of aortic valve surgery (AVR) with or without coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), among patients with moderate/severe aortic stenosis (AS) and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD), and its relationship with survival.
Methods And Results:
The Duke Echocardiographic Database (N = 132 804) was queried for patients with mean gradient ≥25 mmHg and/or peak velocity ≥3 m/s and LVSD (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤50%) from 1 January 1995-28 February 2014. For analyses purposes, AS was defined both by mean gradient and calculated aortic valve area (AVA) criteria. Time-dependent indicators of AVR in multivariable Cox models were used to assess the relationship of AVR and all-cause mortality. A total of 1634 patients had moderate (N = 1090, 67%) or severe (N = 544, 33%) AS by mean gradient criteria. Overall, 287 (26%) patients with moderate AS and 263 (48%) patients with severe AS underwent AVR within 5 years of the qualifying echo. There were 863 (53%) deaths observed up to 5 years following index echo. After multivariable adjustment in an inverse probability weighted regression model, AVR was associated with higher 5-year survival amongst patients with moderate AS and severe AS whether classified by AVA or mean gradient criteria. Over all, AVR ± CABG compared with medical therapy was associated with significantly lower mortality [hazard ratio, HR = 0.49 (0.38, 0.62), P < 0.0001]. Compared with CABG alone, CABG + AVR was associated with better survival [HR = 0.18 (0.12, 0.27), P < 0.0001].
Conclusions:
In patients with moderate/severe AS and LVSD, mortality is substantial and amongst those selected for surgery, AVR with or without CABG is associated with higher survival. Research is required to understand factors contributing to current practice patterns and the possible utility of transcatheter approaches in this high-risk cohort.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Aortic Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Mitral Stenosis III: Medical Management
Aortic Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests
Cardiomyopathy VII: Pre and Post Operative Nursing Management
Mitral Stenosis IV: Nursing Management
Mitral Stenosis I: Introduction

