Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of the Recent Updates to the ACC/AHA and ESC Guidelines for the Management of Valvular Heart Disease: Similarities and Differences

  • Valvular Heart Disease (TL Kiefer, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Cardiology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

There have been several advances in the diagnosis and management of valvular heart disease (VHD) over the last decade. These have been reflected in the latest European and North American guidelines, although both contain significant similarities and differences. In this review, we highlight the important overlaps and variations between the updated guidelines and their previous versions to help guide the general cardiologist.

Recent Findings

There has been extensive revision on the use of percutaneous treatments, the indications for intervention in asymptomatic VHD, and perioperative bridging therapies.

Summary

The updated guidelines provide new recommendations in many aspects of VHD; however, there remain significant gaps in the role of biomarkers in VHD and the long-term outcomes of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and transcatheter therapies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Nkomo VT, Gardin JM, Skelton TN, Gottdiener JS, Scott CG, Enriquez-Sarano M. Burden of valvular heart diseases: a population-based study. Lancet. 2006;368(9540):1005–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. • Binder RK, Dweck M, Prendergast B. The year in cardiology: valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(8):912–20. This paper provides an overview of the recent advances in diagnostic imaging and interventional techniques that have taken place over the last few years. It includes summaries of the seminal trials that have shaped recent guidelines.

  3. Roth GA, Mensah GA, Johnson CO, Addolorato G, Ammirati E, et al. Global burden of cardiovascular diseases and risk factors, 1990-2019: update from the GBD 2019 study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76(25):2982-3021.

  4. Eleid MF, Michelena HI, Nkomo VT, Nishimura RA, Malouf JF, Scott CG, et al. Causes of death and predictors of survival after aortic valve replacement in low flow vs. normal flow severe aortic stenosis with preserved ejection fraction. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;16(11):1270–5.

  5. Kadem L, Dumesnil JG, Rieu R, Durand LG, Garcia D, Pibarot P. Impact of systemic hypertension on the assessment of aortic stenosis. Heart. 2005;91(3):354–61.

  6. Lindman BR, Otto CM. Time to treat hypertension in patients with aortic stenosis. Circulation. 2013;128(12):1281–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cowell-2005-A-randomized-trial-of-intensive-lip.pdf.

  8. Chan KL, Teo K, Dumesnil JG, Ni A, Tam J, Investigators A. Effect of lipid lowering with rosuvastatin on progression of aortic stenosis: results of the aortic stenosis progression observation: measuring effects of rosuvastatin (ASTRONOMER) trial. Circulation. 2010;121(2):306–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ochiai T, Saito S, Yamanaka F, Shishido K, Tanaka Y, Yamabe T, et al. Renin-angiotensin system blockade therapy after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Heart. 2018;104(8):644–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dahl JS, Eleid MF, Michelena HI, Scott CG, Suri RM, Schaff HV, et al. Effect of left ventricular ejection fraction on postoperative outcome in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing aortic valve replacement. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8(4).

  11. Bohbot Y, de Meester de Ravenstein C, Chadha G, Rusinaru D, Belkhir K, Trouillet C, et al. Relationship between left ventricular ejection fraction and mortality in asymptomatic and minimally symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019;12(1):38–48.

  12. Madigan M, Atoui R. Non-transfemoral access sites for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Dis. 2018;10(7):4505–15.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Klodas E, Enriquez-Sarano M, Tajik AJ, Mullany CJ, Bailey KR, Seward JB. Aortic regurgitation complicated by extreme left ventricular dilation: Long-term outcome after surgical correction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;27(3):670–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bonow-1991-Serial-long-term-assessment-of-the-.pdf.

  15. Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, Bueno H, Cleland JGF, Coats AJS, et al. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: the task force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2016;37(27):2129–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ribeiro HB, Lerakis S, Gilard M, Cavalcante JL, Makkar R, Herrmann HC, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis: the TOPAS-TAVI registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71(12):1297–308.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zuo W, Yang M, He Y, Hao C, Chen L, Ma G. Single or dual antiplatelet therapy after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: an updated systemic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Dis. 2019;11(3):959–68.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Jochheim D, Barbanti M, Capretti G, Stefanini GG, Hapfelmeier A, Zadrozny M, et al. Oral anticoagulant type and outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(16):1566–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Chakravarty T, Patel A, Kapadia S, Raschpichler M, Smalling RW, Szeto WY, et al. Anticoagulation after surgical or transcatheter bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74(9):1190–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Dangas GD, Tijssen JGP, Wohrle J, Sondergaard L, Gilard M, Mollmann H, et al. A controlled trial of rivaroxaban after transcatheter aortic-valve replacement. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(2):120–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. •• Collet JP, Van Belle E, Thiele H, Berti S, Lhermusier T, Manigold T, et al. Apixaban vs. standard of care after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the ATLANTIS trial. Eur Heart J. 2022;43(29):2783–97. The findings from this study show non inferiority when comparing apixaban to standard of care (antiplatelet or vitamin K antagonist) following TAVI, irrespective of the indication for oral anticoagulation.

  22. Regitz-Zagrosek V, Roos-Hesselink JW, Bauersachs J, Blomstrom-Lundqvist C, Cifkova R, De Bonis M, et al. 2018 ESC Guidelines for the management of cardiovascular diseases during pregnancy. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(34):3165–241.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. St Bartholomews Hospital, London, UK

    Nabila Laskar & Thomas Treibel

  2. Barts Health Trust, London, UK

    Sveeta Badiani

  3. St Bartholomews Hospital and University College Hospital, London, UK

    Sanjeev Bhattacharyya & Guy Lloyd

Authors
  1. Nabila Laskar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sveeta Badiani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Treibel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sanjeev Bhattacharyya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Guy Lloyd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nabila Laskar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Nabila Laskar reports salary support from Medtronic (2020–2021); Funding from Barts Charity. They are also currently conducting a pilot study on valvular heart disease incidence in the community, this will form part of a higher research degree (2020–2023) related to patents planned, issued, or pending. Funding from Barts Charity has contributed to the purchase of echocardiography devices for current service evaluation programme to identify valvular heart disease in the community. Thomas Treibel reports research grants from British Heart Foundation, European Commission, Academy of Medical Science, Barts Charity, UCH/UCLH Biomedical Research Centre; Educational grant from Pfizer; Member of Data Safety Monitoring Board for Bypass CTCA; and Board member of the British Society of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance. Guy Lloyd reports consulting fees from GE; payment or honoraria from Edwards, Jannsen, Siemens, and GE; leadership or fiduciary role in British Cardiovascular Society; and research support from Medtronic. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Valvular Heart Disease

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Laskar, N., Badiani, S., Treibel, T. et al. Comparison of the Recent Updates to the ACC/AHA and ESC Guidelines for the Management of Valvular Heart Disease: Similarities and Differences. Curr Cardiol Rep 25, 147–156 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-023-01840-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-023-01840-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation