Search

Competing Interests: RTH reports speaker fees from Abbott Structural, Baylis Medical, and Philips Healthcare. DM reports speaker fees from GE HealthCare, Philips Healthcare, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Janssen-Cilag. BRL is supported by the National Institutes of Health (grants R01AG073633 and R01HL164526) and has received speaker fees and investigator-initiated research grants from Edwards Lifesciences. VD received speaker fees from Edwards Lifesciences, Philips Healthcare, Novartis, and Medtronic, and consulting fees from Edwards Lifesciences and Novo Nordisk. MRD is supported by the British Heart Foundation (FS/SCRF/21/32010) and is the recipient of the Sir Jules Thorn Award for Biomedical Research 2015 (15/JTA); he has received speaker fees from Pfizer, Radcliffe Cardiology, Edwards, and Novartis, and consulting fees from Novartis, Jupiter Bioventures, Beren Therapeutics, and Silence Therapeutics.

Over the past decade, the field of valvular heart disease (VHD) has rapidly transformed, largely as a result of the development and improvement of less invasive transcatheter approaches to valve repair or replacement. This transformation has been supported by numerous well-designed randomized trials, but they have centered almost entirely on devices and procedures. Outside this scope of focus, however, myriad aspects of therapy and management for patients with VHD have either no guidelines or recommendations based only on expert opinion and observational studies. Further, research in VHD has often failed to engage patients to inform study design and identify research questions of greatest importance and relevance from a patient perspective. Accordingly, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened a Working Group on Patient-Centered Research in Valvular Heart Disease, composed of clinician and research experts and patient advocacy experts to identify gaps and barriers to research in VHD and identify research priorities. While recognizing that important research remains to be done to test the safety and efficacy of devices and procedures to treat VHD, we intentionally focused less attention on these areas of research as they are more commonly pursued and supported by industry. Herein, we present the patient-centered research gaps, barriers, and priorities in VHD and organized our report according to the "patient journey," including access to care, screening and diagnosis, preprocedure therapy and management, decision making when a procedure is contemplated (clinician and patient perspectives), and postprocedure therapy and management. It is hoped that this report will foster collaboration among diverse stakeholders and highlight for funding bodies the pressing patient-centered research gaps, opportunities, and priorities in VHD in order to produce impactful patient-centered research that will inform and improve patient-centered policy and care.

Multivalvular disease (MVD) is common among patients with valvular disease, and has a complex pathophysiology dependent on the specific combination of valve lesions. Diagnosis is challenging because several echocardiographic methods commonly used for the assessment of stenosis or regurgitation have been validated only in patients with single-valve disease. Decisions about the timing and type of treatment should be made by a multidisciplinary heart valve team, on a case-by-case basis. Several factors should be considered, including the severity and consequences of the MVD, the patient's life expectancy and comorbidities, the surgical risk associated with combined valve procedures, the long-term risk of morbidity and mortality associated with multiple valve prostheses, and the likelihood and risk of reoperation. The introduction of transcatheter valve therapies into clinical practice has provided new treatment options for patients with MVD, and decision-making algorithms on how to combine surgical and percutaneous treatment options are evolving rapidly. In this Review, we discuss the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of MVD, focusing on the combinations of valve pathologies that are most often encountered in clinical practice.

[Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite numerous promising therapeutic targets, there are no proven medical treatments for calcific aortic stenosis (AS). Multiple stakeholders need to come together and several scientific, operational, and trial design challenges must be addressed to capitalize on the recent and emerging mechanistic insights into this prevalent heart valve disease. This review briefly discusses the pathobiology and most promising pharmacologic targets, screening, diagnosis and progression of AS, identification of subgroups that should be targeted in clinical trials, and the need to elicit the patient voice earlier rather than later in clinical trial design and implementation. Potential trial end points and tools for assessment and approaches to implementation and design of clinical trials are reviewed. The efficiencies and advantages offered by a clinical trial network and platform trial approach are highlighted. The objective is to provide practical guidance that will facilitate a series of trials to identify effective medical therapies for AS resulting in expansion of therapeutic options to complement mechanical solutions for late-stage disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aortic stenosis is 1 of the most common heart valve diseases among adults. When symptoms develop, prognosis is poor, and current guidelines recommend prompt aortic valve replacement. Depending of the severity of the aortic stenosis and the presence of concomitant heart disease and medical comorbidities, stress testing represents a reasonable strategy to help better risk stratify asymptomatic patients. The present report provides a comprehensive review of the current available data on stress testing in aortic stenosis and subsequently summarizes its potential for guiding the optimal timing of aortic valve replacement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]