External Validation of Two Different Cardiac Damage Staging Systems for Aortic Stenosis in Patients Treated with Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

<b>Background</b>: Several cardiac damage staging systems for aortic stenosis (AS) have been proposed, but their usefulness in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) remains unknown. <b>Objectives</b>: We aim to externally validate two staging systems in patients who underwent SAVR. <b>Methods</b>: Single-centre prospective cohort of patients treated with SAVR (2017-2022). Based on baseline echocardiographic parameters, patients were classified into the different stages of two published staging systems (Généreux et al. and Gutiérrez et al.), and the discriminatory yield of these systems for 1-year mortality was evaluated. <b>Results</b>: In total, 350 patients were analysed (mean age 69 (9.4) years, 37.8% were female). The median EuroSCORE II was 1.7 (1.1-3.1), and 1-year mortality occurred in 17 (4.8%) patients. The staging system developed by Gutiérrez et al. had an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.687 (95% CI: 0.571-0.803) and was superior to Généreux et al.'s system (AUC of 0.554; 95% CI: 0.439-0.669; <i>p</i> = 0.008). Applying Gutiérrez et al.'s system, 1-year mortality rates progressively increased with higher damage staging: 1.9% (2/103) for Stage 0; 5.1% (5/175) for Stage 1; 12.5% (5/40) for Stage 2; and 15.6% (5/32) for Stage 3 (which represents right-sided damage measured by right ventricular-arterial coupling (RVAc); <i>p</i>= 0.038). No significant differences in outcomes between stages were found when using the staging proposed by Généreux et al. (<i>p</i> = 0.218). <b>Conclusions</b>: In a surgical cohort of patients with AS, a cardiac staging system that included RVAc showed greater discriminatory power for 1-year mortality. Assessing the interrelation between right ventricular function and afterload could help in better risk stratification in this context.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2026-02-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15051795
Primary Topic
Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

External Validation of Two Different Cardiac Damage Staging Systems for Aortic Stenosis in Patients Treated with Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

Manuel Carnero, Carlos Gil, Fabián Islas, S Gil-Abizanda et al.
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
article

External Validation of Two Different Cardiac Damage Staging Systems for Aortic Stenosis in Patients Treated with Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

Manuel Carnero, Carlos Gil, Fabián Islas, S Gil-Abizanda, Daniel Pérez-Camargo, Carmen Olmos, Ricardo Román, María Rivadeneira, Lourdes Montero, Eduardo Pozo, Patrick O’Neill
article en

Abstract

<b>Background</b>: Several cardiac damage staging systems for aortic stenosis (AS) have been proposed, but their usefulness in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) remains unknown. <b>Objectives</b>: We aim to externally validate two staging systems in patients who underwent SAVR. <b>Methods</b>: Single-centre prospective cohort of patients treated with SAVR (2017-2022). Based on baseline echocardiographic parameters, patients were classified into the different stages of two published staging systems (Généreux et al. and Gutiérrez et al.), and the discriminatory yield of these systems for 1-year mortality was evaluated. <b>Results</b>: In total, 350 patients were analysed (mean age 69 (9.4) years, 37.8% were female). The median EuroSCORE II was 1.7 (1.1-3.1), and 1-year mortality occurred in 17 (4.8%) patients. The staging system developed by Gutiérrez et al. had an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.687 (95% CI: 0.571-0.803) and was superior to Généreux et al.'s system (AUC of 0.554; 95% CI: 0.439-0.669; <i>p</i> = 0.008). Applying Gutiérrez et al.'s system, 1-year mortality rates progressively increased with higher damage staging: 1.9% (2/103) for Stage 0; 5.1% (5/175) for Stage 1; 12.5% (5/40) for Stage 2; and 15.6% (5/32) for Stage 3 (which represents right-sided damage measured by right ventricular-arterial coupling (RVAc); <i>p</i>= 0.038). No significant differences in outcomes between stages were found when using the staging proposed by Généreux et al. (<i>p</i> = 0.218). <b>Conclusions</b>: In a surgical cohort of patients with AS, a cardiac staging system that included RVAc showed greater discriminatory power for 1-year mortality. Assessing the interrelation between right ventricular function and afterload could help in better risk stratification in this context.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 15(5)
Hospital La Luz (ES), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos (ES), Universidad Europea de Madrid (ES)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 46%
Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.