How fast did your aortic stenosis progress?

[bvdr]

I'm just curious about the rate of progression in aortic stenosis.
I know it is highly individualized and I have read that sometimes it is almost latent and then rapidly progresses. What is the experience with our members here?

What has sparked this new found interest is on my echo report last December my aortic valve was 1.8. (no significant stenosis), although it does have mildly thickened leaflets. The echo last week measured it as 1.4 (now stenotic?). I'll ask my cardio some questions about this when I get my post-rehab stress test on Dec. 1st.

Thanks for your input.

 

[mamsram]

hi Betty,


MY history began with a discovered murmer at age 17. Thru the years, and a dozen physicals, it was not mentioned (very quiet???). Then at age 55, it was mentioned at a physical at work. I went to my GP and he had an echo done. The echo revealed an opening of 1.5 cm. This was not alarming to him and in the aortic position he was not worried about endocarditis. 5 years later the murmer was very loud and he had another echo done. I was now at .9 cm and he put me on antibiotics for dental work. He decided I should have an echo in 6 mnths. every 6 months it closed another cm. to .8, then.7, then .6 that was when it was reclassified from severe to critical. An immediate valve replacement was, without a doubt, necessary.

Hope this is of interest in your persuit of info.

 

[epstns]

Hi Betty,

They say every case progresses at a different rate. Mine has been "stable" at around 1.08 to 1.1 sq cm for the past year, but we have no idea of how rapidly it got there, as I was only diagnosed a year ago.

One other important thing to keep in mind is that there is a range of error on these tests and one test showing different may not have the same meaning as a change in the trend line of sequential tests. If there was a different technician this time, or even if the technician had a bad day, that could account for some of the difference. I would ask the cardio if he/she feels the difference is significant, but if you feel otherwise the same, I would just keep a watch on it and not worry any more than you must.

 

[Kenny F]

I don't have my actual readings yet as to opening (we are requesting a complete copy for VR.com's entertainment and education). But fall of 2002 I was diagnosed and sent home to come back annually, with no restrictions other than antibiotics for dental work.

This fall, my cardio narrowed it down to "2 or 3 years will be a mistake".

My surgeon, pre-surgery, was concerned because neither of the echos or the cath had provided solid reliable data as to actual size. He actually recommended a trans-esophogeal echo (yeah, right - tubed and awake!), but I was ready for replacement and passed.

Then in surgery suddenly I'm critical stenosis, my valve is "junk" with little defining shape, and I propbably would have died within 2 years (2 years of poor quality of life). Even the week leading up to surgery I could feel differences in my body and was deeply convinced to have this done.

I am now firmly in the "why wait" camp. Nothing is going to change for the better in a year or two, but a lot can go wrong fast.

 

[Heather Fisher]

I knew about mine since childhood but was always deep in denial of ever having to have it fixed. I never really kept track of the valve opening size. A year ago I went to the doc for my annual and the echo showed .9. I was told to come back in 6 months. Six months later it was at .8. I was scheduled for catheterization. My angiogram showed 1.1 so I could have put surgery off but I opted for the surgery anyway just to get it over with. No point in waiting. I have summers off so the timing was right. Just goes to show you, echos are not always that exact.

Heather

 

[fyrfytr]

Hey Betty,
I am sorry to hear you might be having problems with your aortic valve now.
As you know I have had problems with my aortic valve since childhood. The only numbers I have ever heard the cardios talk about is the gradient of the valve. The first 6 catheterizations and 4 echos all showed a gradient of 50, than the cath they did this year show the gradient to be between 20 and 30 and said that it had serious stenosis and severe regurgitation and it was time to do something and this is also when they found the aneurysm on my aorta. I hope this helps you out.
Take Care

Dave
____________________________
Surgery: 4/21/03
Aortic Aneurysm Repair
AVR, with a St. Jude Mechanical

 

[dwfreck]

Betty,

For the last few years my AV had been hovering in the 1.4 cm*cm range until this fall, when we found it had decreased to 1.1.

I can't remember what it was before 1.4 because I've been living with stenosis since birth, and that particular stat wasn't important to remember until my cardiologist started to warn about the likelihood of surgery.

 

[Johnny Stephens]

My AV stenosis (we didn't even know about the mitral probs) went from "not medically significant" to "you need surgery" in only two years. Keep in mind I had large doses of radiation to the chest many years ago, that's likely the reason for the rapid progression once it started.

 

[bvdr]

Thanks everyone. This has been a help. I guess I just feel that if it was going to start progressing it sure would have been nice to have had it handled when I had the MVR but during surgery my surgeon looked things over and decided the mitral was the only one needing replacement. I won't worry about this but I just like to get a feel for what is or what isn't.

Johnny, I actually had some radiation treatments to my chest when I was 14 but not many and not extensive. Whether or not that did any damage is anyone's guess. I think the damage is probably all rheumatic fever related.

 

[Bunny_Rabbit]

Betty

Betty

I'm wondering if you're going through what I seemed to have gone through. I was told on one echo report that I had mild aortic stenosis that was not present before, then on another newer echo report they say that in fact I have aortic sclerosis.

Dunno if that helps any, but it's food for thought.

Take care.

 

[HFK]

hI bETTY, mY STENOSIS WAS DIAGNOSED in 1986 and was very slow to progress til 1998-1999 when I was hospitalized with severe sinus infection, that seem to be the catalyst,it went down hill quickly and needed replacement in aug 2000 diameter was 5.9 without symptoms. In 1997 it was 1.2 if that helps. HFK

 

[HFK]

Correction my diameter was.59 before surgery. HFK

 

[dwfreck]

Betty,

One additional wrinkle I forgot to mention, I also have AV regurgitation, and it is in the driver's seat on the surgery express. My doc says my stenosis is still "moderate to severe" and, by itself, isn't bad enough to operate (yet).

 

[csutherland]

March, 2001 was the first time Jerry had heard that he had a murmur. An echo showed moderate Mitral regurg & severe Aortic regurg. The cardio put him on BP meds and in June the readings were mild and moderate, respectively. He was told to come back in Dec. We innocently assumed everything was peachy when we went for that appointment. That's when we were hit with the severe stenosis bombshell. First we'd heard of that. So apparently this can come up pretty fast. The surgeon said "you'll definitely be dead in 3 years if you don't get this fixed". Needless to say, it was done the following Feb.

By the way, today was a yearly checkup for him. Everything is good!

 

[bvdr]

I found this article while researching this and thought others might find it interesting:

http://www.escardio.org/society/ejournal/vol1_N17_Prendergast.htm


I found the comment that statins may slow the progression of aortic stenosis interesting.

 

[fdegranville]

Just wondering

Just wondering

HI Betty,
Didn't you have a doctor's appointment scheduled for today?
fdeg