4.6 Review

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Treatment and Outcomes of Severe Aortic Stenosis A Review

期刊

JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
卷 13, 期 2, 页码 149-156

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.08.056

关键词

aortic stenosis; disparities research; outcomes; race and ethnicity; valvular disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aortic stenosis (AS) is among the most common valvular heart diseases encountered in the United States. In this review the authors examine differences between racial and ethnic groups in the epidemiology and management of severe AS, explore potential explanations for these findings, and discuss the implications for improving the delivery of care to racially and ethnically diverse populations. Underrepresented racial and ethnic groups experience a paradoxically lower prevalence or incidence of AS relative to white subjects, despite having a higher prevalence of traditional risk factors. Historically, UREGs with severe AS have had lower rates of both surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement and experienced more post-surgical complications, including, bleeding, worsening heart failure, and rehospitalization. Last, UREGs with severe AS have an increased risk for morbidity and mortality relative to white patients. To date much of the research on AS has examined black-white differences, so there is a need to understand how other racial and ethnic groups with severe AS are diagnosed and treated, with examination of their resulting outcomes. Overall, racial and ethnic disparities in health care access and care delivery are a public health concern given the changing demographics of the U.S. population. These differences in AS management and outcomes highlight the need for additional research into contributing factors and appropriate interventions to address the lower rates of aortic valve replacement and higher morbidity and mortality among UREGs. (C) 2020 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据