4.7 Article

Aortic Valve Calcification and Risk of Stroke The Rotterdam Study

Journal

STROKE
Volume 47, Issue 11, Pages 2859-2861

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.015200

Keywords

aortic valve; calcification; computed tomography; follow-up studies; stroke

Funding

  1. Erasmus MC
  2. Erasmus University Rotterdam
  3. Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research
  4. Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMW)
  5. Research Institute for Diseases in the Elderly
  6. Netherlands Genomics Initiative
  7. Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
  8. Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports
  9. European Commission
  10. Municipality of Rotterdam

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Purpose-It remains uncertain whether aortic valve calcification (AVC) is a risk factor for stroke. Methods-From the population-based Rotterdam Study, 2471 participants (mean age: 69.6 years; 51.8% women) underwent computed tomography to quantify AVC. We assessed prevalent stroke and continuously monitored the remaining participants for the incidence of stroke. Logistic and Cox regression models were used to investigate associations of AVC with prevalent stroke and risk of incident stroke. Results-AVC was present in 33.1% of people. At baseline, 97 participants had ever suffered a stroke. During 18665 person-years of follow-up (mean: 7.9 years), 135 people experienced a first-ever stroke. The presence of AVC was not associated with prevalent stroke (fully adjusted odds ratio: 0.97 (95% confidence interval, 0.61-1.53]) or with an increased risk of stroke (fully adjusted hazard ratio: 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.69-1.44]). Conclusions-Although AVC is a common finding in middle-aged and elderly community-dwelling people, our results suggest that AVC is not associated with an increased risk of stroke.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available