Skip to main content
Pratap Sagar Tiwari, Resident, Internal Medicine,
NGMC
• Anatomy of Aortic valve/variants
• Aortic Regurgitation
• Aortic Stenosis
The AV is located betwn the LVOT and the ascending aorta. It forms the centerpiece of t
heart and closely approximates many other important cardiac structures; specifically, th
PV anteriorly, MV posterolaterally, and TV posteromedially.[1]
Ref:
1. Anderson RH. Clinical anatomy of the aortic root. Heart. Dec 2000;84(6):670-3.
Picture ref: Anderson RH. Clinical anatomy of the aortic root. Heart. Dec 2000;84(6):670-3.
Picture reference: Anderson RH. Clinical anatomy of the aortic root. Heart. Dec 2000;84(6):670-3.
Bicuspid aortic valve
• Bicuspid aortic valves are the most common cardiac
valvular anomaly, occurring in 1- 2% of the general
population.
• It is twice as common in males as in females.[1]

Ref:
1. Tzemos N, Therrien J, Yip J et al (September 2008). "Outcomes in adults with bicuspid aortic valves". JAMA 300 (11): 1317–1325
• AR is a condition due to inadequate closure of the
aortic valve leaflets leading to abnormal retrograde
flow of blood through the aortic valve during cardiac
diastole.
• It can be induced either by damage to and dysfunction
of the aortic valve leaflets or by distortion or dilatation
of the aortic root and ascending aorta
• In the developing world, the most common cause of AR is
rheumatic heart disease. However, in developed
countries, AR is most often due to aortic root dilation or a
congenital bicuspid aortic valve .[1]
Ref:
1. Maurer G. Aortic regurgitation. Heart. Jul 2006;92(7):994-1000.
Leaflet abnormalities

Aortic root or ascending aorta

Rheumatic fever

Systemic hypertension

Endocarditis

Aortitis (eg, syphilis)

Trauma

Reactive arthritis

Bicuspid aortic valve

Ankylosing spondylitis

Rheumatoid arthritis

Trauma/ Dissecting aneurysm

Myxomatous degeneration

Osteogenesis imperfecta

Ankylosing spondylitis

Marfan syndrome/ EDS

Acromegaly

Inflammatory bowel disease

AR is seen more commonly in men than in women. As in the Framingham study, AR was
13% of men versus 8.5% of women.[1] The greater prevalence of AR in men may reflect, in
the male preponderance of underlying conditions such as Marfan syndrome[2] or bicusp
valve[3] .

Ref:
1. Singh JP, Evans JC, et al. Prevalence and clinical determinants of mitral, tricuspid, and AR (the Framingham Heart Study). Am J Cardiol. Mar 15 1999;83(6
2. Keane MG, Pyeritz RE. Medical management of Marfan syndrome. Circulation. May 27 2008;117(21):2802-13.
3. Ortiz JT, Shin DD, Rajamannan NM. Approach to the patient with bicuspid AVand ascending aorta aneurysm. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. Dec 200
Law of laplace
↑ LV Volume

LV Hypertrophy
Sudden large regurgitant volume imposed
on LV of normal size with normal
compliance

1. Rapid ↑ LVEDP and ↑ LAP
2. LV attempts to maintain CO with ↑HR and ↑
Contractility

Attempts to maintain forward SV/CO may be inadequate

Cardiogenic Shock
↓ Forward SV/CO
Pulmonary edema
↑ LVEDP and ↑ LAP

Angina
↓ Coronary perfusion
↑demand myocardial O2
Regurgitant Volume Load

Compensatory Mechanisms:
1. ↑LV dilatation ↑ LVED vol and ↑chamber
compliance
2. ↑ LV hypertrophy
Decompensation

Steadily increasing regurgitant volume load
Further ventricular dilatation  ↑ wall stress
Inability to continue further hypertrophy
Contractile dysfunction  ↓ EF/SV/CO
CHF symptoms
Due to both congestion and ↓
CO

Angina
↓ Coronary perfusion pressure & marked
LVH
deMusset's sign

A head bob occurring with each cardiac cycle

Mueller's sign

Systolic pulsations of the uvula.

Becker's sign

Visible pulsations of the retinal arteries and pupils.

Quincke's
pulses

visible Capillary pulsations in the nailbeds after holding the tip
of the nail.

Duroziez's sign

A systolic and diastolic bruit heard when the femoral artery is
partially compressed.to and fro murmur

Traube's sign

A pistol shot murmur (systolic and diastolic sounds) heard over
the femoral arteries.

Mayne's sign

More than a 15 mmHg decrease in DBP with arm elevation from
the value obtained with the arm in the standard position.

Hill's sign

Popliteal cuff systolic pressure exceeding brachial pressure by
more than 60 mmHg.

Rosenbach's
sign

Systolic pulsations of the liver.

Gerhard's sign

Systolic pulsations of the spleen.
• The diastolic murmur of AR begins immediately after A2
.
• It is high pitched, often blowing in quality, and may be
sustained in intensity or decrescendo.
• It may be soft and barely audible, often appreciated only
when the patient is sitting up, leaning forward, and
holding his or her breath in expiration.
• Patients with a longer diastolic murmur, a displaced left
ventricular impulse, a wide pulse pressure, and the
peripheral findings of a wide pulse pressure are
considered to have severe AR.

Note: When the Diastolic murmur of AR is louder in the 3rd
/4th RICS than in the 3/4th LICS ,the AR is likely to result
from Aortic root dilatation than deformitiy of leaflets
alone.
Ref: ACC/AHA Guidelines 2006
• In a review of the literature, the presence of an early
diastolic murmur, as heard by a cardiologist, was the
most useful finding for establishing the presence of AR
(positive likelihood ratio 8.8 [ie, the odds of AR are
increased 8.8 fold]) and its absence the most useful
finding for eliminating the presence of AR (negative
likelihood ratio 0.2 to 0.3 [ie, the odds of disease are
reduced by a factor of 0.2 to 0.3]) .[1]

Ref:
1. Choudhry NK, Etchells EE. The rational clinical examination. Does this patient have aortic regurgitation? JAMA 1999; 281:2231
• Laboratory testing in patients with aortic regurgitation
should be guided by the clinical scenario.
• For example, in patients with AR due to suspected
infective endocarditis, peripheral blood counts and
cultures may help clarify the diagnosis and identify the
causative organism.
• Specific serologic tests may assist in the diagnosis of
rheumatological causes.
• Aortic valve structure and morphology (bileaflet versus trileaflet,
flail, thickening)
• Presence of vegetations
• Severity of AR
• Color Doppler jet width
• Vena contracta width
• Regurgitant volume, fraction, and orifice area
• Premature closure of the mitral valve (seen in severe AR)
• Associated lesions of the aorta, including dilation, aneurysm,
dissection
• LV structure and function
• LV hypertrophy and dilation
• EF and end-systolic dimension are key determinants of outcome
MILD

MOD

SEVERE

Structural parameters
Left ventricular size

N

N or dilated

Dilated, except acute
AR

Aortic leaflets

N or abnormal

N or abnormal

Abnormal/flail, or wide
coaptation defect

Color Doppler jet
width

Central jet, width <25
percent of LVOT

Central jet, width 25 to
65 percent of LVOT

Central jet width >65
percent of LVOT

Doppler vena
contracta width

<3 mm

3 to 6 mm

>6 mm

Doppler parameters

Quantitative parameters
Regurgitant volume

<30 mL/beat

30 to 59 mL/beat

≥60 mL/beat

Regurgitant fraction

<30 percent

30 to 49 percent

≥50 percent

Regurgitant orifice
area

<0.10 cm2

0.10 to 0.29 cm2

≥0.30 cm2

Severe chronic AR is typically a/w c/f including a longer diastolic
murmur, a displaced LVI, a wide PP, and the peripheral findings of
References:
1. ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines
2. Gaasch WH, Andrias CW, Levine HJ. Chronic aortic regurgitation: the effect of aortic valve replacement on left ventricular volume, mass and function. Circulation 1978; 58:82
3. Schuler G, Peterson KL, Johnson AD, et al. Serial noninvasive assessment of left ventricular hypertrophy and function after surgical correction of AR. Am J Cardiol 1979; 44:
4. Borow KM, Green LH, Mann T, et al. End-systolic volume as a predictor of postoperative LVperformance in volume overload from valvular regurgitation. Am J Med 1980; 68:
5. Henry WL, Bonow RO, et al. Observations on the optimum time for operative intervention for AR. Evaluation of the results of AVR in symptomatic patients. Circulation 1980;
6. Kumpuris AG, Quinones MA, Waggoner AD, et al. Importance of preoperative hypertrophy, wall stress and end-systolic dimension as echocardiographic predictors of norma
of left ventricular dilatation after valve replacement in chronic aortic insufficiency. Am J Cardiol 1982; 49:1091.
7. Gaasch WH, Carroll JD, Criscitiello MG. Chronic AR: prognostic value of left ventricular end-systolic dimension and end-diastolic radius/thickness ratio. J Am Coll Cardiol 19
8. Stone PH, Clark RD, Goldschlager N, et al. Determinants of prognosis of patients with aortic regurgitation who undergo aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol 1984; 3:1
9. Bonow RO, Rosing DR, McIntosh CL, et al. The natural history of asymptomatic patients with aortic regurgitation and normal left ventricular function. Circulation 1983; 68:509
10. Bonow RO, Lakatos E. Serial long-term assessment of the natural history of asymptomatic patients with chronic AR and normal left ventricular systolic function. Circulation
11. Siemienczuk D, Greenberg B, Morris C, et al. Chronic aortic insufficiency: factors associated with progression to aortic valve replacement. Ann Intern Med 1989; 110:587.
Class I indications for CC under current ACC/AHA
guidelines include the following:[1]
• Assessment of coronary anatomy prior to aortic valve
surgery in patients with risk factors for coronary artery
disease.

Ref:
1. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC Jr, Faxon DP, Freed MD. 2008 focused update incorporated into the
ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease.
.
Class IIa - The weight of evidence or opinion is in favor of efficacy of the following test
patients with AR in the above settings.

Ref:
1. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC Jr, Faxon DP, Freed MD. 2008 focused update
incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with VHD.
• In acute severe AR, surgical intervention is usually
indicated, but the patient may be supported medically
with dobutamine to augment cardiac output and shorten
diastole and sodium nitroprusside to reduce afterload
in hypertensive patients.
• In chronic severe AR, vasodilator therapy may be used
in select conditions to reduce afterload in patients with
systolic hypertension to minimize wall stress and
optimize LV function; in normotensive patients,
vasodilator therapy is not likely to reduce regurgitant
volume (preload) significantly and thus may not be of
Ref:
1. Bekeredjian R, Grayburn PA. Valvular heart disease: aortic regurgitation. Circulation. Jul 5 2005;112(1):125-34.
clinical benefit.[1]
• The acute administration of Na Nitoprusside ,
hydralazine, nifedipine or felodipine ↓PVR and results in
an immediate augmentation in forward CO and a ↓ in
regurgitant volume.

• With nitroprusside and hydralazine ,these acute
hemodynamic changes lead to a consistent ↓in EDV
and an ↑in EF.

References:
1. Miller RR, Vismara LA, .Afterload reduction therapy with nitroprusside in severe AR: improved cardiac performance and reduced regurgitant volume.
AmJ Cardiol 976;38:564–7
2. Greenberg BH, DeMots H. Beneficial effects of hydralazine on rest and exercise hemodynamics in patients with chronic severe aortic insufficiency.
Circulation 1980;62:49–55
3. FiorettiP, BenussiB.Afterload reduction with nifedipine in aortic insufficiency. AmJ Cardiol 1982;49:1728–32
• Reduced EDV and ↑EF have also been observed in
small number of pts receiving long term oral therapy with
hydralazine and nifedipine for a period of 1-2 yrs. With
nifedipine these effects are A/W ↓ in LV mass.[1,2]

• Reduced BP with enalapril and quinapril has been A/W
↓ in EDV and mass but no change in EF.[3,4]

References:
1. Scognamiglio R, Fasoli G. Long-term nifedipine unloading therapy in asymptomatic patients with chronic severe AR. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990; 16:424–9.
2. Greenberg B, Massie B, et al. Long-term vasodilator therapy of chronic AI: a randomized double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Circulation 1988;7
3. Lin M, Chiang HT,etal.Vasodilator therapy in chronic asymptomatic AR: enalapril versus hydralazine therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994;24:1046–53.
4. Schon HR, Dorn R. Effects of 12 months quinapril therapy in asymptomatic patients with chronic AR. J Heart Valve Dis 1994;3:500–9.
• Indicated for long-term therapy in patients with chronic,
severe AR and symptoms of LV dysfunction but who
are not candidates for surgery.( CLASS I: LOE-b)
• Is reasonable for short-term therapy in patients with
severe LV dysfunction and HF symptoms to improve
their hemodynamic profile before proceeding with
surgery.(CLASS IIa: LOE-c)

• Is acceptable for long-term therapy in asymptomatic
patients with severe AR and LV dilation with normal
Ref:
1. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC Jr, Faxon DP, Freed MD. 2008 focused update incorporated into the ACC/A
EF. (CLASS IIb: LOE-b)
guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease.
Note: LOE = Level of Evidence
• Antibiotic prophylaxis prior to dental procedures is no
longer routinely recommended for all patients with AR
under current ACC/AHA guidelines.[1]

Ref:
1. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC Jr, Faxon DP, Freed MD. 2008 focused update incorporated into the ACC/A
2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease
• Surgical treatment of AR usually requires replacement
of the diseased valve with a prosthetic valve, although
valve-sparing repair is increasingly possible with
advances in surgical technique and technology.
• Patient is symptomatic.
• Patient is asymptomatic, with a resting EF of ≤ 55%.
• Patient is asymptomatic, with LV dilation (LV end-systolic
dimension >55 mm).

Ref:
1. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC Jr, Faxon DP, Freed MD. 2008 focused update incorporated into the ACC
2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease.
• For patients undergoing AV replacement, careful
consideration should be given to the relative risks and
benefits of mechanical vs bioprosthetic valves.
• Mechanical valves : more durable but require long-term
anticoagulation with warfarin due to increased risk of
thrombosis.
• Bioprosthetic valves carry a greater risk of long-term
deterioration and risk of reoperation but avoid the need
for long-term warfarin.[1]

Ref:
1. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC Jr, Faxon DP, Freed MD. 2008 focused update incorporated into the ACC/A
2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease.
.
• Inpatient care is required for most patients with acute
severe aortic regurgitation (AR), particularly with
symptoms
or
evidence
of
hemodynamic
decompensation.
ESD

EDD

Stable Dimension

Incresing
Dimension

<45 mm

< 60 mm

Evaluate 6-12 mn
Repeat Echo in 12 mnth

3mnth
3 mnth

45-50 mm

60-70 mm

Evaluate 6 mn
Repeat Echo in 12 mnth

3 mnth
3 mnth

50-55 mm

70-75 mm

Evaluate in 6 mn
Repeat Echo 6 mnth

3 mnth
3 mnth

>55 mm

> 75 mm

Surgery
• Left untreated, acute severe AR is likely to lead to
considerable morbidity and mortality from either the
underlying cause (typically infective endocarditis or
aortic
dissection)
or
from
hemodynamic
decompensation of the LV.
• Potential complications in patients with chronic severe
AR include progressive LV dysfunction and dilation, CHF,
MI, arrhythmia, and sudden death.
The prognosis for patients with severe AR depends on the
presence or absence of LV dysfunction and symptoms, as
follows:[1]
• In asymptomatic patients with normal EF
1. Rate of progression to symptoms &/or LVD = < 6% per yr
2. Rate of progression to asymptomatic LVD = < 3.5% per yr
3. Rate of sudden death = less than 0.2% per yr
• In asymptomatic patients with decreased EF, rate of
progression to symptoms = >25% per year.
• In symptomatic patients, mortality rate = >10% per yr.
The strongest predictors of outcome are echocardiographic
parameters (EF and LV end-systolic dimension).
Ref:
1. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC Jr, Faxon DP, Freed MD. 2008 focused update
incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease.
References:
1. 2008 update on ACC/AHA 2006 Guideline on VHD.
2. Harrison’s Principle of Internal Medicine ,18th ed.
3. Washington manual; Cardiology Subspeciality Consult
,2nd ed.
4. Cardiology Secrets by Glenn L Levine, 3rd ed.
5. Uptodate 19.1 .Last literature review sep 30 2011.
6. Emedicine “
7. Mayo Clinic