4.6 Article

Temporal trends in the prevalence and severity of aortic stenosis within a contemporary and diverse community-based cohort

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 384, Issue -, Pages 107-111

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2023.04.047

Keywords

Aortic stenosis; Prevalence; Epidemiology; Age; Gender; Race; Ethnicity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that the population prevalence of aortic stenosis (AS) has increased significantly over a short timeframe, while the distribution of disease severity remains relatively stable.
Background: Data on the epidemiology of aortic stenosis (AS) are primarily derived from single center experiences and administrative claims data that do not delineate by degree of disease severity. Methods: An observational cohort study of adults with echocardiographic AS was conducted January 1st, 2013-December 31st, 2019 at an integrated health system. The presence/grade of AS was based on physician inter-pretation of echocardiograms. Results: A total of 66,992 echocardiogram reports for 37,228 individuals were identified. The mean & PLUSMN; standard deviation (SD) age was 77.5 & PLUSMN; 10.5, 50.5% (N = 18,816) were women, and 67.2% (N = 25,016) were non-Hispanic whites. The age-standardized AS prevalence increased from 589 (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 580-598) to 754 (95% CI 744-764) cases per 100,000 during the study period. The age-standardized AS prevalences were similar in magnitude among non-Hispanic whites (820, 95% CI 806-834), non-Hispanic blacks (728, 95% CI 687-769), and Hispanics (789, 95% CI 759-819) and substantially lower for Asian/Pacific Is-landers (511, 95% CI 489-533). Finally, the distribution of AS by degree of severity remained relatively un-changed over time. Conclusions and relevance: The population prevalence of AS has grown considerably over a short timeframe although the distribution of AS severity has remained stable.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available