Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Valvular Heart Disease in Women, Differential Remodeling, and Response to New Therapies

  • Women’s Health (M Wood, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

In the United States, valvular heart disease (VHD) has a prevalence of 2.5%, most commonly presenting as aortic stenosis (AS) or mitral valve regurgitation (MR) and increasingly observed to be of a degenerative etiology. Women frequently have latent symptoms despite significant disease, and it is therefore pertinent to consider both clinical symptoms and imaging findings for decision-making on treatment. Indeed, significant advances have been made in noninvasive imaging allowing for more accurate diagnosis and disease prognostication. While echo remains the standard diagnostic test, multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provide complementary information on aortic valve calcification and left ventricular (LV) function, respectively. For any given calcification load or increase in calcification density of the aortic valve, women have greater increase in aortic valve stenosis severity than men; thus, moderate AS in women warrants closer attention. MRI allows identification of different patterns of hypertrophy and remodeling, extent of LV fibrosis, and insights into differential reverse remodeling and clinical outcomes in men and women. In conjunction with surgical treatment, percutaneous technologies are being increasingly used in the management of VHD. Nearly 50% of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are women. In high- or intermediate-risk subjects with significant symptomatic AS, TAVR has been shown to be noninferior to surgical AVR (SAVR). Notably, whereas both treatment strategies are equally effective in men, transfemoral TAVR has been shown to be superior to SAVR resulting in better survival in women. Analogously, few data have examined sex differences with percutaneous MitraClip devices in the treatment of degenerative MR, and men and women appear to have equivalent composite outcomes. Randomized clinical trial data are presently awaited for outcomes in the percutaneous treatment of functional MR secondary to ischemic heart disease. This review discusses the current evidence in the diagnosis and treatment of VHD with a focus on sex differences in left-sided VHD and management in women.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

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

  1. Etzioni DA, Starnes VA. The epidemiology and economics of cardiothoracic surgery in the elderly. In: Katlic MR, editor. Cardiothoracic surgery in the elderly: evidence-based practice. New York: Springer; 2011. p. 5–24.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Bach DS, Radeva JI, Birnbaum HG, Fournier AA, Tuttle EG. Prevalence, referral patterns, testing, and surgery in aortic valve disease: leaving women and elderly patients behind? J Heart Valve Dis. 2007;16:362–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. • Genereux P, Stone GW, O’Gara PT, et al. Natural history, diagnostic approaches, and therapeutic strategies for patients with asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:2263–88. This article summarizes the natural course and significance of asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. McNeely C, Vassileva C. Mitral valve surgery in women: another target for eradicating sex inequality. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2016;9:S94–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. • Clavel MA, Messika-Zeitoun D, Pibarot P, et al. The complex nature of discordant severe calcified aortic valve disease grading: new insights from combined Doppler echocardiographic and computed tomographic study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:2329–38. This article discusses the significance of aortic valve calcification and the discordance in extent of calcification and aortic stenosis severity by sex

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lee JM, Park SJ, Lee SP, et al. Gender difference in ventricular response to aortic stenosis: insight from cardiovascular magnetic resonance. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0121684.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2187–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1609–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Adams DH, Popma JJ, Reardon MJ, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding prosthesis. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1790–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Reardon MJ, Van Mieghem NM, Popma JJ, et al. Surgical or transcatheter aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:1321–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. • Williams M, Kodali SK, Hahn RT, et al. Sex-related differences in outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis: insights from the PARTNER Trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:1522–8. This article analyzes the sex differences in outcomes by TAVR or SAVR for significant aortic stenosis

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. White J, Doshi D, Williams M, Szerlip M, Squiers J, Webb J, et al. Sex-specific differences after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in intermediate risk patients: an analysis from the PARTNER 2 randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68:B279–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chieffo A, Petronio AS, Mehilli J, et al. Acute and 30-day outcomes in women after TAVR: results from the WIN-TAVI (Women’s International Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) Real-World Registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:1589–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Feldman T, Foster E, Glower DD, et al. Percutaneous repair or surgery for mitral regurgitation. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1395–406.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Feldman T, Kar S, Elmariah S, et al. Randomized comparison of percutaneous repair and surgery for mitral regurgitation: 5-year results of EVEREST II. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:2844–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dweck MR, Boon NA, Newby DE. Calcific aortic stenosis: a disease of the valve and the myocardium. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1854–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. • Dweck MR, Khaw HJ, Sng GK, et al. Aortic stenosis, atherosclerosis, and skeletal bone: is there a common link with calcification and inflammation? Eur Heart J. 2013;34:1567–74. This article discusses the pathogenesis of aortic valve stenosis and the distinct role of inflammation and local calcific processes

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cramariuc D, Rogge BP, Lonnebakken MT, et al. Sex differences in cardiovascular outcome during progression of aortic valve stenosis. Heart. 2015;101:209–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Nguyen V, Mathieu T, Melissopoulou M, et al. Sex differences in the progression of aortic stenosis and prognostic implication: the COFRASA-GENERAC study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;9:499–501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1597–607.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chandrasekhar J, Dangas G, Yu J, et al. Sex-based differences in outcomes with transcatheter aortic valve therapy: TVT registry From 2011 to 2014. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68:2733–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Nashef SA, Roques F, Hammill BG, et al. Validation of European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) in North American cardiac surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2002;22:101–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. STS. http://riskcalc.sts.org/stswebriskcalc/ - /. 2007.

  24. Afilalo J, Kim S, O’Brien S, et al. Gait speed and operative mortality in older adults following cardiac surgery. JAMA Cardiol. 2016;1:314–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Alfredsson J, Stebbins A, Brennan JM, et al. Gait speed predicts 30-day mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: results from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry. Circulation. 2016;133:1351–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. • Naoum C, Blanke P, Dvir D, et al. Clinical outcomes and imaging findings in women undergoing TAVR. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;9:483–93. This review article discusses the baseline sex differences in patients undergoing TAVR, with a focus on imaging

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Buellesfeld L, Stortecky S, Kalesan B, et al. Aortic root dimensions among patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:72–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Cheung K, Boodhwani M, Chan KL, Beauchesne L, Dick A, Coutinho T. Thoracic aortic aneurysm growth: role of sex and aneurysm etiology. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6:e003792.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. O’Connor SA, Morice MC, Gilard M, et al. Revisiting sex equality with transcatheter aortic valve replacement outcomes: a collaborative, Patient-Level Meta-Analysis of 11,310 Patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:221–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Chin CW, Khaw HJ, Luo E, et al. Echocardiography underestimates stroke volume and aortic valve area: implications for patients with small-area low-gradient aortic stenosis. Can J Cardiol. 2014;30:1064–72.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Michelena HI, Margaryan E, Miller FA, et al. Inconsistent echocardiographic grading of aortic stenosis: is the left ventricular outflow tract important? Heart. 2013;99:921–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kamperidis V, van Rosendael PJ, Katsanos S, et al. Low gradient severe aortic stenosis with preserved ejection fraction: reclassification of severity by fusion of Doppler and computed tomographic data. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:2087–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Minners J, Allgeier M, Gohlke-Baerwolf C, Kienzle RP, Neumann FJ, Jander N. Inconsistencies of echocardiographic criteria for the grading of aortic valve stenosis. Eur Heart J. 2008;29:1043–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Coutinho T. Arterial stiffness and its clinical implications in women. Can J Cardiol. 2014;30:756–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Dumesnil JG, Pibarot P, Carabello B. Paradoxical low flow and/or low gradient severe aortic stenosis despite preserved left ventricular ejection fraction: implications for diagnosis and treatment. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:281–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. • Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG. Paradoxical low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis: new evidence, more questions. Circulation. 2013;128:1729–32. This article provides information on the mechanisms and associations of low flow low gradient aortic valve stenosis

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Dweck MR, Joshi S, Murigu T, et al. Left ventricular remodeling and hypertrophy in patients with aortic stenosis: insights from cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2012;14:50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. • Dobson LE, Fairbairn TA, Musa TA, et al. Sex-related differences in left ventricular remodeling in severe aortic stenosis and reverse remodeling after aortic valve replacement: a cardiovascular magnetic resonance study. Am Heart J. 2016;175:101–11. This article demonstrates sex differences in aortic stenosis remodeling and reverse remodeling using magnetic resonance imaging

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Clavel MA, Pibarot P, Messika-Zeitoun D, et al. Impact of aortic valve calcification, as measured by MDCT, on survival in patients with aortic stenosis: results of an international registry study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:1202–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Thaden JJ, Nkomo VT, Suri RM, et al. Sex-related differences in calcific aortic stenosis: correlating clinical and echocardiographic characteristics and computed tomography aortic valve calcium score to excised aortic valve weight. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:693–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Aggarwal SR, Clavel MA, Messika-Zeitoun D, et al. Sex differences in aortic valve calcification measured by multidetector computed tomography in aortic stenosis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;6:40–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Simard L, Cote N, Dagenais F, et al. Sex-related discordance between aortic valve calcification and hemodynamic severity of aortic stenosis: is valvular fibrosis the explanation? Circ Res. 2017;120:681–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Petrov G, Regitz-Zagrosek V, Lehmkuhl E, et al. Regression of myocardial hypertrophy after aortic valve replacement: faster in women? Circulation. 2010;122:S23–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Petrov G, Dworatzek E, Schulze TM, et al. Maladaptive remodeling is associated with impaired survival in women but not in men after aortic valve replacement. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7:1073–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Stangl V, Baldenhofer G, Knebel F, et al. Impact of gender on three-month outcome and left ventricular remodeling after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Am J Cardiol. 2012;110:884–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Lee J, Shen M, Parajuli N, Oudit GY, McMurtry MS, Kassiri Z. Gender-dependent aortic remodelling in patients with bicuspid aortic valve-associated thoracic aortic aneurysm. J Mol Med. 2014;92:939–49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Dobson LE, Musa TA, Uddin A, et al. Acute reverse remodelling after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a link between myocardial fibrosis and left ventricular mass regression. Can J Cardiol. 2016;32:1411–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kararigas G, Dworatzek E, Petrov G, et al. Sex-dependent regulation of fibrosis and inflammation in human left ventricular remodelling under pressure overload. Eur J Heart Fail. 2014;16:1160–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Milano AD, Faggian G, Dodonov M, et al. Prognostic value of myocardial fibrosis in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;144:830–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Merten C, Beurich HW, Zachow D, et al. Aortic regurgitation and left ventricular remodeling after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a serial cardiac magnetic resonance imaging study. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:476–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Dweck MR, Joshi S, Murigu T, et al. Midwall fibrosis is an independent predictor of mortality in patients with aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:1271–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Barone-Rochette G, Pierard S, De Meester de Ravenstein C, et al. Prognostic significance of LGE by CMR in aortic stenosis patients undergoing valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:144–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. •• Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, et al. 2017 AHA/ACC focused update of the 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000503. This guideline document from the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Task Force provides recommendations on the management of valvular heart disease

  54. Fuchs C, Mascherbauer J, Rosenhek R, et al. Gender differences in clinical presentation and surgical outcome of aortic stenosis. Heart. 2010;96:539–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Hamed O, Persson PJ, Engel AM, McDonough S, Smith JM. Gender differences in outcomes following aortic valve replacement surgery. Int J Surg. 2009;7:214–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Kapadia SR, Leon MB, Makkar RR, et al. 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with standard treatment for patients with inoperable aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2485–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Van Belle E, Hengstenberg C, Lefevre T, et al. Cerebral embolism during transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the BRAVO-3 MRI study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68:589–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Van Mieghem NM, El Faquir N, Rahhab Z, et al. Incidence and predictors of debris embolizing to the brain during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:718–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Chakravarty T, Sondergaard L, Friedman J, et al. Subclinical leaflet thrombosis in surgical and transcatheter bioprosthetic aortic valves: an observational study. Lancet. 2017;389:2383–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Lewin MB, Otto CM. The bicuspid aortic valve: adverse outcomes from infancy to old age. Circulation. 2005;111:832–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Kong WK, Regeer MV, Ng AC, et al. Sex differences in phenotypes of bicuspid aortic valve and aortopathy: insights from a large multicenter, international registry. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017;10:e005155.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. • Michelena HI, Suri RM, Katan O, et al. Sex differences and survival in adults with bicuspid aortic valves: verification in 3 contemporary echocardiographic cohorts. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5:e004211. This article provides contemporary data on sex differences in clinical outcomes with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Chandra S, Lang RM, Nicolarsen J, et al. Bicuspid aortic valve: inter-racial difference in frequency and aortic dimensions. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5:981–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Mylotte D, Lefevre T, Sondergaard L, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:2330–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Iung B, Vahanian A. Epidemiology of valvular heart disease in the adult. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2011;8:162–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Delling FN, Vasan RS. Epidemiology and pathophysiology of mitral valve prolapse: new insights into disease progression, genetics, and molecular basis. Circulation. 2014;129:2158–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:e57–185.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Mirabel M, Iung B, Baron G, et al. What are the characteristics of patients with severe, symptomatic, mitral regurgitation who are denied surgery? Eur Heart J. 2007;28:1358–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Vassileva CM, McNeely C, Mishkel G, Boley T, Markwell S, Hazelrigg S. Gender differences in long-term survival of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing mitral valve operations. Ann Thorac Surg. 2013;96:1367–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Seeburger J, Eifert S, Pfannmuller B, et al. Gender differences in mitral valve surgery. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;61:42–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Mokhles MM, Siregar S, Versteegh MI, et al. Male-female differences and survival in patients undergoing isolated mitral valve surgery: a nationwide cohort study in the Netherlands. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016;50:482–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Mantovani F, Clavel MA, Michelena HI, Suri RM, Schaff HV, Enriquez-Sarano M. Comprehensive imaging in women with organic mitral regurgitation: implications for clinical outcome. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;9:388–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Estevez-Loureiro R, Settergren M, Winter R, et al. Effect of gender on results of percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair with MitraClip system. Am J Cardiol. 2015;116:275–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Attizzani GF, Ohno Y, Capodanno D, et al. Gender-related clinical and echocardiographic outcomes at 30-day and 12-month follow up after MitraClip implantation in the GRASP registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;85:889–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Giordano A, Indolfi C, Baldi C, Ferraro P, Corcione N, Polimeno M, et al. Comparison of men versus women undergoing transcatheter mitral valve repair with Mitraclip. J Cardiol Ther. 2015;2:285–90.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Grayburn PA. Sex Differences in mitral regurgitation before and after mitral valve surgery. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;9:397–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Chiam PT, Ruiz CE. Percutaneous transcatheter mitral valve repair: a classification of the technology. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:1–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. De Backer O, Piazza N, Banai S, et al. Percutaneous transcatheter mitral valve replacement: an overview of devices in preclinical and early clinical evaluation. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:400–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Feldman T, Kar S, Rinaldi M, et al. Percutaneous mitral repair with the MitraClip system: safety and midterm durability in the initial EVEREST (Endovascular Valve Edge-to-Edge REpair Study) cohort. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:686–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Cullen MW, Cabalka AK, Alli OO, et al. Transvenous, antegrade Melody valve-in-valve implantation for bioprosthetic mitral and tricuspid valve dysfunction: a case series in children and adults. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:598–605.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Cheung A, Webb JG, Barbanti M, et al. 5-year experience with transcatheter transapical mitral valve-in-valve implantation for bioprosthetic valve dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1759–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Muller DW, Farivar RS, Jansz P, et al. Transcatheter mitral valve replacement for patients with symptomatic mitral regurgitation: a global feasibility trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:381–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Motiwala SR, Delling FN. Assessment of mitral valve disease: a review of imaging modalities. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2015;17:390.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Zuhlke L, Engel ME, Karthikeyan G, et al. Characteristics, complications, and gaps in evidence-based interventions in rheumatic heart disease: the Global Rheumatic Heart Disease Registry (the REMEDY study). Eur Heart J. 2015;36:1115–22a.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Zuhlke L, Karthikeyan G, Engel ME, et al. Clinical Outcomes in 3343 children and adults with rheumatic heart disease from 14 low- and middle-income countries: two-year follow-up of the Global Rheumatic Heart Disease Registry (the REMEDY Study). Circulation. 2016;134:1456–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Pfannmueller B, Eifert S, Seeburger J, et al. Gender-dependent differences in patients undergoing tricuspid valve surgery. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;61:37–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Kapadia SR, Krishnaswamy A, Tuzcu EM. Percutaneous therapy for tricuspid regurgitation: a new frontier for interventional cardiology. Circulation. 2017;135:1815–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. McElhinney DB, Cabalka AK, Aboulhosn JA, et al. Transcatheter tricuspid valve-in-valve implantation for the treatment of dysfunctional surgical bioprosthetic valves: an international, multicenter registry study. Circulation. 2016;133:1582–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Aboulhosn J, Cabalka AK, Levi DS, et al. Transcatheter valve-in-ring implantation for the treatment of residual or recurrent tricuspid valve dysfunction after prior surgical repair. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10:53–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Lima FV, Yang J, Xu J, Stergiopoulos K. National trends and in-hospital outcomes in pregnant women with heart disease in the United States. Am J Cardiol. 2017;119:1694–700.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. van Hagen IM, Roos-Hesselink JW, Donvito V, et al. Incidence and predictors of obstetric and fetal complications in women with structural heart disease. Heart. 2017; doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2016-310644.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Zena and Michael A. Wiener Cardiovascular Institute, The Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, One Gustave L. Levy Place, Box 1030, New York, NY, 10029-6574, USA

    Jaya Chandrasekhar MBBS, MS, FRACP, George Dangas MD, PhD, FACC & Roxana Mehran MD, FACC

Authors
  1. Jaya Chandrasekhar MBBS, MS, FRACP
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. George Dangas MD, PhD, FACC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Roxana Mehran MD, FACC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roxana Mehran MD, FACC.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

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

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Women’s Health

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chandrasekhar, J., Dangas, G. & Mehran, R. Valvular Heart Disease in Women, Differential Remodeling, and Response to New Therapies. Curr Treat Options Cardio Med 19, 74 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-017-0573-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-017-0573-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation