Review Article

Incidence and Pathology of Aortic Regurgitation

Register or Login to View PDF Permissions
Permissions× For commercial reprint enquiries please contact Springer Healthcare: ReprintsWarehouse@springernature.com.

For permissions and non-commercial reprint enquiries, please visit Copyright.com to start a request.

For author reprints, please email rob.barclay@radcliffe-group.com.
Information image
Average (ratings)
No ratings
Your rating

Abstract

Aortic regurgitation (AR) is the third most common valvular heart disease, with its prevalence and severity increasing with age. AR can arise from degenerative, congenital, inflammatory and infectious aetiologies, manifesting as primary AR with intrinsic leaflet disease, secondary AR due to aortopathy or annular dilatation, or a combination. Furthermore, AR can be acute, as observed in endocarditis and aortic dissection, or chronic, as seen in calcific aortic valve disease, connective tissue disorders, or bicuspid valve phenotypes. This review discusses the aetiopathology of these various AR manifestations (primary, secondary, acute and chronic AR), highlighting diagnostic challenges and implications for aortic valve replacement and transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Disclosure:NVM has received grants from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic, PulseCath BV and Teleflex and consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Amgen, Anteris, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, JenaValve, Medtronic, PulseCath BV and Teleflex, and is on the Interventional Cardiology editorial board; this did not affect peer review. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Received:

Accepted:

Published online:

Correspondence Details:Nicolas M Van Mieghem, Department of Interventional Cardiology, Thoraxcenter, Erasmus MC, Office Nt 645 45, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, the Netherlands. E: n.vanmieghem@erasmusmc.nl

Open Access:

© The Author(s). This work is open access and is licensed under CC-BY-NC 4.0. Users may copy, redistribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes, provided the original work is cited correctly.

Aortic regurgitation (AR) is the third most common valvular heart disease, with a higher relative incidence in men (19.7 per 100,000 person-years) than women (10.8 per 100,000 person-years).1,2 The prevalence and severity of AR increase with age, so the AR burden is expected to increase due to demographic ageing.1–4 Notably, AR can remain asymptomatic or misinterpreted, leading to underestimation of the actual frequency. Undiagnosed mild and moderate AR has been observed in 8–14% of elderly patients with no known valvular heart disease in the UK.4,5 Severe AR was present in <2%. A recent report from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons database shows that AR accounts for 7% of all surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) procedures, which implies that aortic stenosis (AS) remains the principal indication for surgery.6 This is partly explained by AS being two to three times more prevalent in the general population.1,4 However, it may also reflect AR underdiagnosis and misinterpretation. Delayed or missed diagnoses of AR lead to progressive left ventricular (LV) dilatation and decline in ejection fraction, which are common reasons to defer SAVR. This underscores a need for good diagnostic tools and clinical awareness to ensure timely diagnosis of AR.

Echocardiography is the primary imaging modality for diagnosing and guiding treatment in AR. Current guidelines recommend intervention based on AR severity, LV ejection fraction (LVEF) and LV dimensions.7,8 However, assessing AR severity with echocardiography can be challenging, particularly with eccentric jets or complex anatomy, and the evidence for current dimensional and ejection fraction cut-offs remains disputed.9,10 Emerging evidence suggests that additional or complementary imaging tools and biomarkers may offer a more accurate assessment of disease progression. LV volumes may be preferable to dimensional measures, while global longitudinal strain and interstitial fibrosis on cardiac MRI have shown predictive value in chronic AR and could complement LVEF as indicators of significant, maladaptive LV remodelling due to AR.9,11

The aetiology of AR may be diverse, encompassing degenerative (degeneration of aortic root and/or aortic leaflet), congenital, inflammatory and infectious factors (Table 1). The AR mechanism can be primary with aortic valve leaflet abnormality, secondary with preserved aortic leaflets such as aortic root or annular dilatation, or a combination.8,12

Table 1: Aetiologies of Aortic Regurgitation

Article image

Primary Aortic Regurgitation

Aortic valve leaflet degeneration is the dominant cause of primary AR.12. Primary AR consists of calcific degenerative leaflet disease, commonly associated with AS. Up to 18% of individuals with AR exhibit some degree of AS.1 However, calcification in AR varies and can be mild to non-existent. The amount of calcification will affect contemporary transcatheter treatment options.

Other causes of primary AR feature intrinsic leaflet disorders such as leaflet perforation, prolapse, or restriction. Rheumatic fever primarily impacts the mitral valve but can also cause fibrous infiltrations and restriction of the aortic valve. In developing countries, rheumatic heart disease remains the dominant cause of AR, affecting a younger population compared to developed countries.13,14

Infective endocarditis is the most common cause of acute aortic regurgitation.15 The vegetation can cause perforation, restriction, or malcoaptation of the aortic leaflets and may require urgent surgical intervention. Rarely, acute AR develops because of traumatic injury to the aortic valves. Furthermore, acute AR can result from complications caused by balloon valvuloplasty or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Structural surgical or transcatheter bioprosthetic valve degeneration may result in acquired primary AR.

Secondary and Mixed Forms of Aortic Regurgitation

In secondary AR, the aortic valve leaflets appear structurally normal.

Aortic root pathology with dilatation can create secondary AR through aortic valve leaflet malcoaptation, retraction and prolapse. Overall, degenerative aortopathy is thought to contribute more to the development of AR than calcific degenerative leaflet disease.16 The bicuspid aortic valve phenotype is the most common congenital heart defect, and associated with AR in 20–70% of cases.17,18 Primary AR can develop due to abnormal shear stress leading to degenerative leaflet thickening, restriction, or prolapse.15,17,18 Altered flow dynamics surrounding the bicuspid valve, concomitant aortopathy, and aortic dilatation may result in secondary AR.17 At least a quarter of AR cases in bicuspid aortic valve undergoing aortic valve surgery are deemed secondary AR.12,18

Connective tissue disorders such as Marfan, Loeys-Dietz and vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndromes commonly result in secondary AR due to aortopathy.19 These patients are also at an elevated risk for aortic dissection and need to be monitored on a regular basis. In Marfan syndrome, mutations in the FBN1 gene result in defective fibrillin-1, the main component of microfibrils which together with elastin forms elastic fibres that give support to the extracellular matrix in connective tissue, including the aortic wall.20

Additionally, fibrillin-1 regulates transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) signalling. When defective, it leads to increased TGF-β activity, promoting the degeneration of medial smooth muscle cells and further contributing to the weakening of the aortic wall.21 Likewise, patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome have mutations in the TGF-β receptors (TGFBR1 and TGFBR2), which leads to increased TGF-β signalling and aortopathy at an early age compared to Marfan syndrome.22,23 In vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, mutations in the COL3A1 gene result in insufficient production of type III procollagen, leading to reduced tensile strength and integrity of the connective tissue in the aortic wall.24

Vasculitis such as granulomatosis with polyangiitis, Takayasu’s arteritis and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis may cause inflammation and dilatation of the aortic wall leading to secondary AR. Primary AR has also been described in vasculitis, due to the inflammatory cell infiltration and fibrotic thickening of the aortic leaflets, although it is less common.19 Autoimmune rheumatoid diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus, antiphospholipid syndrome and rheumatoid arthritis may cause AR through systemic inflammation, autoantibody production and immune complex deposition.19

The main cause of acute secondary AR is aortic dissection, which may be iatrogenic or due to the above-mentioned aortopathies.

Non-structural surgical or transcatheter bioprosthetic valve degeneration is characterised by its paravalvular location and is typically detected immediately after the bioprosthetic valve replacement. Transcatheter valve migration may be a rare cause of delayed secondary paravalvular AR. Clinically relevant paravalvular leak (PVL) affects 2–10% of SAVR.25 TAVI is associated with higher rates of predominantly trace or mild PVL. Moderate to severe PVL is linked to increased mortality and rates of such cases have fallen below 5% with newer TAVI devices.26–28 Factors affecting PVL include annular characteristics (e.g. root calcifications, irregular shapes), valve positioning and under-sizing, and, for surgery, tissue quality and procedural technique (e.g. continuous suture use).25 Additionally, endocarditis can result in paravalvular AR.

Pathophysiology of Acute and Chronic Aortic Regurgitation

In acute AR, the sudden onset of severe diastolic regurgitation results in a rapid increase in LV end diastolic volume and pressure, which may spiral towards pulmonary congestion and cardiogenic shock (Figure 1A). In chronic AR, the left ventricle has the time to adapt to the volume overload and the LV end diastolic pressure volume relationship flattens, which postpones the occurrence of symptoms (Figure 1B). Remodelling includes LV dilatation, eccentric hypertrophy and increased stroke volume to compensate for the regurgitation volume. However, over time the incessant volume overload will overrule the ventricular compensatory remodelling capacity. Eventually, this cascade will progress to LV dilatation, myocardial fibrosis and systolic failure with depressed LVEF.

Figure 1: Pressure–Volume Loops in Acute and Chronic Aortic Regurgitation

Article image

Conclusion

AR is the third most common valvular heart disease, and its burden is expected to rise due to demographic ageing. Managing AR remains challenging due to complexities in patient selection, diagnosis and evolving treatment strategies. A thorough understanding of the diverse aetiologies, from primary leaflet disease to secondary aortopathy, along with the distinct pathophysiological mechanisms of acute and chronic AR, is essential for optimising current management and guiding future therapeutic advancements.

References

  1. Andell P, Li X, Martinsson A, et al. Epidemiology of valvular heart disease in a Swedish nationwide hospital-based register study. Heart 2017;103:1696–703. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  2. Singh JP, Evans JC, Levy D, et al. Prevalence and clinical determinants of mitral, tricuspid, and aortic regurgitation (the Framingham Heart Study). Am J Cardiol 1999;83:897–902. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  3. Nkomo VT, Gardin JM, Skelton TN, et al. Burden of valvular heart diseases: a population-based study. Lancet 2006;368:1005–11. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  4. d’Arcy JL, Coffey S, Loudon MA, et al. Large-scale community echocardiographic screening reveals a major burden of undiagnosed valvular heart disease in older people: the OxVALVE population cohort study. Eur Heart J 2016;37:3515–22. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  5. Tsampasian V, Militaru C, Parasuraman SK, et al. Prevalence of asymptomatic valvular heart disease in the elderly population: a community-based echocardiographic study. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2024;25:1051–8. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  6. Thourani VH, Habib R, Szeto WY, et al. Survival after surgical aortic valve replacement in low-risk patients: a contemporary trial benchmark. Ann Thorac Surg 2024;117:106–12. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  7. Writing Committee Members, Otto CM, Nishimura RA, et al. 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2021;77:e25–197. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  8. Vahanian A, Beyersdorf F, Praz F, et al. 2021 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J 2022;43:561–632. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  9. Ranard LS, Bonow RO, Nishimura RA, et al. Imaging methods for evaluation of chronic aortic regurgitation in adults: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2023;82:1953–66. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  10. Tsampasian V, Victor K, Bhattacharyya S, et al. Echocardiographic assessment of aortic regurgitation: a narrative review. Echo Res Pract 2024;11:1. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  11. Saeed M, Bersali A, Darwish A, et al. Assessing regurgitation severity, adverse remodeling, and fibrosis with CMR in aortic regurgitation. Curr Cardiol Rep 2024;26:413–21. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  12. Yang LT, Michelena HI, Maleszewski JJ, et al. Contemporary etiologies, mechanisms, and surgical approaches in pure native aortic regurgitation. Mayo Clin Proc 2019;94:1158–70. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  13. Peters F, Karthikeyan G, Abrams J, et al. Rheumatic heart disease: current status of diagnosis and therapy. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther 2020;10:305–15. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  14. Sliwa K, Carrington M, Mayosi BM, et al. Incidence and characteristics of newly diagnosed rheumatic heart disease in urban African adults: insights from the Heart of Soweto study. Eur Heart J 2010;31:719–27. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  15. Voit J, Otto CM, Burke CR. Acute native aortic regurgitation: clinical presentation, diagnosis and management. Heart 2022;108:1651–60. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  16. Iung B, Vahanian A. Epidemiology of acquired valvular heart disease. Can J Cardiol 2014;30:962–70. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  17. Rodríguez-Palomares JF, Dux-Santoy L, Guala A, et al. Mechanisms of aortic dilation in patients with bicuspid aortic valve: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2023;82:448–64. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  18. Detaint D, Michelena HI, Nkomo VT, et al. Aortic dilatation patterns and rates in adults with bicuspid aortic valves: a comparative study with Marfan syndrome and degenerative aortopathy. Heart 2014;100:126–34. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  19. Grygiel-Górniak B, Oduah MT, Olagunju A, Klokner M. Disorders of the aorta and aortic valve in connective tissue diseases. Curr Cardiol Rep 2020;22:70. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  20. Sakai LY, Keene DR, Renard M, De Backer J. FBN1: The disease-causing gene for Marfan syndrome and other genetic disorders. Gene 2016;591:279–91. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  21. Grewal N, Gittenberger-de Groot AC. Pathogenesis of aortic wall complications in Marfan syndrome. Cardiovasc Pathol 2018;33:62–9. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  22. Loeys BL, Schwarze U, Holm T, et al. Aneurysm syndromes caused by mutations in the TGF-β receptor. N Engl J Med 2006;355:788–98. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  23. Takeda N, Hara H, Fujiwara T, et al. TGF-β signaling-related genes and thoracic aortic aneurysms and dissections. Int J Mol Sci 2018;19:2125. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  24. Goyal A, Keramati AR, Czarny MJ, et al. The genetics of aortopathies in clinical cardiology. Clin Med Insights Cardiol 2017;11. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  25. Ruiz CE, Hahn RT, Berrebi A, et al. Clinical trial principles and endpoint definitions for paravalvular leaks in surgical prosthesis: an expert statement. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;69:2067–87. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  26. Chau KH, Chen S, Crowley A, et al. Paravalvular regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a pooled PARTNER 2 study. EuroIntervention 2022;17:1053–60. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  27. Vemulapalli S, Carroll JD, Mack MJ, et al. Procedural volume and outcomes for transcatheter aortic-valve replacement. N Engl J Med 2019;380:2541–50. 
    Crossref | PubMed
  28. Matta A, Regueiro A, Urena M, et al. Comparison of paravalvular leak in SAPIEN 3 and EVOLUT PRO valves in transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a multicenter registry. Am J Cardiol 2023;207:114–20. 
    Crossref | PubMed