You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Education in Heart
Valvular heart diseases
Serum biomarkers in valvular heart disease
  1. Syed KM Gardezi1,2,
  2. Sean Coffey3,
  3. Bernard D Prendergast4,
  4. Saul G Myerson1,2
  1. 1 Department of Cardiology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
  2. 2 Radcliffe Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
  3. 3 Department of Medicine, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Otago, New Zealand
  4. 4 Department of Cardiology, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Professor Saul G Myerson, Department of Cardiology, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK; saul.myerson{at}cardiov.ox.ac.uk

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2016-310482

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Learning objectives

    • Understand the pathophysiological pathways involved in deteriorating valve disease, which may provide useful targets for biomarker development.

    • Understand the currently available serum biomarkers in valve disease and their utility in clinical practice.

    • The potential for future biomarkers, based on the known metabolic and biological pathways.

    Introduction

    Valvular heart disease (VHD) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality whose prevalence is set to increase dramatically as a consequence of the increase in life expectancy in middle-income and high-income nations. Community echocardiographic screening has identified a major burden of undiagnosed VHD in older people, with some degree of valve degeneration in almost 50% and undiagnosed clinically significant (moderate–severe) disease affecting 1 in 10.1 Population statistics project an increase in the elderly population, such that there will be an estimated 4 million people aged between 75 and 84 years in the UK by 2018, while the population >85 years is set to double by 2028.2 Meanwhile, rheumatic heart disease accounts for a much higher proportion of valve pathology in developing nations and contributes to the growing worldwide prevalence.3 4

    Despite wider appreciation of the emerging importance of VHD, the mechanisms underlying its development (particularly in degenerative pathology) are poorly understood, and the role of serum biomarkers in guiding clinical management in individual patients is relatively unexplored. European guidelines5 for the diagnosis and management of VHD make reference to the use of serum B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) as a marker of prognosis in aortic stenosis (AS) and mitral regurgitation (MR), but thresholds are poorly defined, and there are no definitive recommendations on its use.

    As the prevalence of VHD increases, it will be increasingly important to develop our understanding of the factors that determine the rate of progression (allowing the planning of careful and efficient follow-up and timely intervention). A large proportion of patients with VHD remain asymptomatic and most have mild disease. It is therefore fundamentally important to identify these patients at an earlier stage prior to the development of complications and risk stratify them according to the likelihood of developing significant disease that requires intervention. In this review, we outline current knowledge concerning existing and emerging serum biomarkers that have an established or potential role in the assessment and management of patients with VHD. Imaging (echocardiography, CT and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)) and physiological tests (eg, cardiopulmonary exercise testing) are also vital in this clinical endeavour but are beyond the scope of the article.

    The role of serum biomarkers in the management of valve disease

    The potential roles of circulating biomarkers are:

    1. identification of baseline disease activity and prediction of progression—allows the identification of higher risk patients early and potentially a subset of patients who might benefit from early surgery (even in the absence of symptoms)

    2. identification of those patients who are less likely to benefit from valve repair/replacement—some have severely impaired left ventricular (LV) function that is unlikely to recover after surgery

    3. understanding the aetiology of VHD—to facilitate the development of future treatment strategies (eg, tailored medical therapy).

    Most existing biomarkers are of myocardial origin (reflecting their established clinical and research pedigree in heart failure) and are likely to provide prognostic utility since morbidity and mortality are largely related to myocardial dysfunction. Conversely, biomarkers of valve leaflet pathology are lacking as a consequence of the relatively small mass of tissue, the rudimentary blood supply and current poor understanding of the biological stimuli for the development of degenerative VHD.

    Myocardial biomarkers may provide significant advantages over existing imaging techniques. For example, while CMR is able to identify discrete and diffuse myocardial fibrosis, current techniques are relatively insensitive and only able to identify diffuse fibrosis once it is significantly advanced. Moreover, identification of myocardial wall stress prior to the development of fibrosis would arguably be of greater clinical value.

    Biomarkers capable of predicting VHD progression would also be of major clinical value, even if only to determine the frequency of follow-up. For example, the faster rate of progression of calcific AS in subjects with renal disease might be monitored via measurement of factors reflecting the systemic process rather than disease activity affecting the valve itself.

    We have focused on the circulating biomarkers for which reasonable data exists. Several other biomarkers have been examined in an effort to understand the underlying biology of VHD (eg, serum fetuin-A),6 but these are generally small cohorts with limited or no clinical follow-up and are not discussed further here.

    Pathophysiology

    Since existing serum biomarkers associated with VHD are mostly related to secondary effects on the ventricular myocardium, a brief overview of the myocardial effects of VHD is helpful. Figure 1 (adapted from ref7) also highlights the myocardial physiological processes that may be suitable targets for biomarkers.

    Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Serum biomarkers and their role in pathophysiology of VHD, adapted from Thum et al 7. BNP, B-type natriuretic peptide; GDF-15, growth differentiation factor-15; MR-proANP, midregional proatrial natriuretic peptide; ANP, atrial natriuretic peptide; NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; VHD, valvular heart disease.

    Pressure overload in AS

    LV systolic pressure is elevated in AS to overcome outflow obstruction with resulting myocyte hypertrophy (to reduce wall stress) and eventual interstitial fibrosis.8 However, the overall pattern of this adaptive response is highly heterogeneous and may include concentric remodelling and concentric or eccentric hypertrophy.8 Patterns of LV adaptation and degree of hypertrophy correlate poorly with the severity of valve narrowing and asymmetric patterns of wall thickening are common.9 Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) also leads to reduced density of coronary arteriolar vessels and increased transmural pressures, resulting in increased coronary vascular resistance and reduced coronary flow reserve.10 11 The reduction of coronary flow reserve limits the ability of the coronary circulation to increase flow to match myocardial oxygen demand, especially during exercise, and is a key factor in the development of myocardial ischaemia and the occurrence of symptoms.12 Repetitive myocardial ischaemia related to the exhaustion of coronary flow reserve can lead to apoptosis of myocytes and to the development of ‘replacement’ myocardial fibrosis. This type of fibrosis occurs predominantly in the subendocardial and midwall layers of the left ventricle wall and is generally not reversible following relief of LV pressure overload by aortic valve replacement (AVR).12 Diastolic dysfunction occurs early in the disease course and worsens with progression of stenosis severity and myocardial fibrosis. In more advanced stages, raised LV filling pressures lead to secondary pulmonary hypertension.13 14 LV systolic function, measured by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and cardiac output, are generally well preserved even in the presence of severe AS, likely due to the increase in LV wall thickness, which normalises wall stress, whereas the reduced LVEF or cardiac output occurs only in late-stage disease and is usually preceded by clinical symptoms.8 Subtle LV systolic dysfunction may occur prior to a reduction in ejection fraction; however, the occurrence of myocardial fibrosis initially in the subendocardium, in which the myocardial fibres are oriented longitudinally, may result in a reduction in longitudinal function, which is compensated for by relatively well-preserved radial and circumferential function.15–17 Measures of long axis function (eg, systolic mitral annular velocities on tissue Doppler echocardiography) may be an indicator of subclinical LV systolic dysfunction despite preserved LVEF and the absence of symptoms and can be related to adverse outcomes.18

    The factors that determine the ‘tipping’ point at which myocardial compensation becomes dysfunction are not entirely clear and are likely to be variable between individuals. LV mass does not seem to correlate with the severity of valve disease9 but has shown some association with future events,19 20 although with significant overlap between LV mass groups. The processes of myocyte stress and ultimately degeneration to necrosis/cell death and replacement fibrosis seem to be better indicators of decompensation and are associated with reduced LV function on histological assessment of cell degeneration and biochemical/DNA markers.21 Patchy fibrosis is also a predictor of mortality.22 These would therefore seem to be suitable targets for biomarker development.

    Volume overload in aortic and mitral regurgitation

    The left ventricle is volume overloaded in aortic regurgitation (AR) as a result of combined elevation of preload and afterload. The excess preload reflects the volume overload that is in turn directly related to the severity of AR. Afterload is increased since the increased stroke volume is ejected into the high-impedance aorta, and systolic hypertension is a frequent consequence. In addition, elevated end-diastolic volume increases LV wall stress. Combined elevation of preload and afterload excess ultimately leads to progressive LV dilatation with resulting systolic dysfunction.23–27

    The left ventricle is also volume overloaded in MR though afterload is normal. The adaptive changes of the ventricle include dilatation with normal wall thickness and proportional (‘eccentric’) hypertrophy,23–27 while the left atrium also enlarges to accommodate the regurgitant volume.28 LVEF may be supranormal in chronic MR as a result of increased preload and the afterload-reducing effects of ventricular ejection into the low-impedance left atrium. A low normal ejection fraction can therefore be misleading as a measure of contractile function.29 Severe MR also leads to pulmonary hypertension (associated with worse outcomes)30 right ventricular pressure overload and ultimate right ventricular failure.30 The precise mechanism underlying myocardial decompensation in AR and MR remains unclear; however, it is likely to be related to chronic volume overload leading to eccentric hypertrophy and progressive LV dilatation leading to LV impairment.31

    Right ventricular effects of mitral stenosis (MS) and tricuspid regurgitation (TR)

    Left atrial pressure is increased, and compliance is reduced in MS leading to transmission of the transmitral pressure gradient to the pulmonary circulation and eventual pulmonary hypertension.32 Severe MS is associated with pulmonary arteriolar vasoconstriction, intimal hyperplasia and medial hypertrophy, and median survival less than 3 years once severe pulmonary hypertension is established.23 33

    TR is usually a secondary phenomenon as a consequence of left-sided heart disease or intrinsic pulmonary pathology, rather than resulting from a primary tricuspid valve lesion. Secondary TR is mainly caused by dilation of the tricuspid annulus and/or tethering of the valve leaflets secondary to right ventricular dysfunction. The right ventricle is very tolerant of increasing volume overload well and TR can remain clinically silent for a prolonged period before eventual progressive right ventricular dilatation and dysfunction.34

    Biomarkers associated with myocardial stress

    Natriuretic peptides

    Natriuretic peptides are the most widely used markers of myocardial strain and are primarily synthesised in the heart and regulated by myocardial stress in response to volume or pressure overload.35 They include B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and the N-terminal fragment of its prohormone (NT-proBNP), atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), adrenomedullin and the midregional fragment of the prohormone (MR-proANP). These prohormones are released under conditions of haemodynamic stress and processed into biologically active natriuretic peptides, which induce vasodilation, natriuresis and diuresis.36

    Various studies have demonstrated that BNP is a marker of AS severity and a predictor of poor prognosis in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients37–42 (table 1). The underlying mechanism triggering BNP activation and release seems to be chronic pressure overload leading to LV hypertrophy, increased wall stress, fibrosis, diastolic dysfunction and raised filling pressures.43 However, increasing wall thickness/hypertrophy normalises wall stress and may limit the rise in BNP until late in the disease process. In addition, BNP is related to age, and there is considerable overlap between different groups of patients with AS, which further limit its utility in clinical practice.

    View this table:
    Table 1

    A summary of the key studies showing the role of serum biomarkers in valvular heart disease (VHD)

    AR usually progresses slowly with increasing volume overload and LV adaptation by means of dilatation and hypertrophy. Elevation of BNP levels has been associated with severe AR and LV dysfunction on exercise echocardiography, as reflected by a higher end-systolic volume index and lower longitudinal strain rate,44 but again this is a late stage of the disease. Various well-designed studies have shown that NT-proBNP levels correlate closely with the severity of AR and the patient’s functional status44–47 (table 1) but with significant overlap between groups limiting individual utility.

    In MR, plasma natriuretic peptide levels increase with increasing severity in patients with both asymptomatic and symptomatic MR, independent of LV systolic function48 49 and are also associated with higher mortality and the combined end point of death or heart failure in both chronic organic (primary) as well as degenerative MR.50–52 BNP levels relate to the both the severity as well as being a marker of poor prognosis in patients with MS.53 54

    Data on BNP assays in TR remain limited. In a small study of patients undergoing surgery for severe isolated TR, BNP levels correlated directly with right ventricular volume (and inversely with LVEF) and were helpful in predicting 1-year mortality.55

    In summary, BNP is a potential marker of disease severity and overall prognosis within groups, in patients with AS, AR and MR. However, thresholds of abnormality (which might trigger clinical concern or the need for intervention) are poorly defined, and there is significant overlap between groups in the studies to date. Moreover, BNP levels may be elevated in various other conditions, including renal failure, chronic obstructive airways disease, obesity, atrial fibrillation, liver cirrhosis, myocardial infarction and vary according to age, exercise and fluid status.56 These factors likely limit its potential for the assessment of individual patients, and serial measurement following the definition of baseline levels remains inappropriate until further data emerge.

    Growth differentiation factor(GDF)-15

    The cytokine GDF-15 (also known as MIC-1) is a member of the transforming growth factor (TGF)-β superfamily57 and produced at low levels via autocrine or paracrine pathways under baseline conditions by most tissues.57 58 It provides endogenous protection against ischaemia and reperfusion-induced cardiomyocyte apoptosis and is strongly induced via phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase / Protein kinase B (PI3K-Akt)-dependent signalling pathways following ischaemic myocardial injury.59 GDF-15 has been associated with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and with the degree of myocardial fibrosis in patients with end-stage non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy.60–62 Various studies have confirmed its role as a useful predictor of both cardiovascular and all-cause mortality.63–66

    Biomarkers associated with myocardial hypertrophy and fibrosis

    ST2

    ST2 is an inflammatory cytokine member of the interleukin (IL)-1 receptor family that predicts mortality and heart failure in patients with acute myocardial infarction and may play a vital role in cardiac pathophysiology. ST2 is thought to be involved in modifying immunological processes, specifically mediated by T-helper lymphocytes. IL-33, a hormone that may protect against LVH and myocardial fibrosis has recently been identified as the ligand for ST2.36 In the Framingham study, ST2 was associated with death, heart failure and major cardiovascular events, but not with echocardiographic indices of myocardial dysfunction. Furthermore, patients with elevated levels of both ST2 and BNP were found to be at considerably higher risk of death than those with elevation of one or neither marker.57 In the emergency setting, the PRIDE study has also found ST2 levels to be higher in patients presenting with acute heart failure.67

    As indicated above, ST2 is one of several markers (alongside GDF-15 and NT-proBNP), which are elevated in patients with severe calcific AS and which predict higher mortality after valve replacement.68 Furthermore, in a recent study of 86 patients with moderate to severe AS (aortic valve area <1.5 cm2) and preserved LVEF (>50%), ST2 was related to the severity of valve stenosis the extent of diastolic dysfunction and the ability to distinguish between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients69 (table 1).

    ST2 is a promising serum biomarker that correlates well with the severity of AS and poor clinical outcomes. Large prospective studies are now required to validate its utility in patients with significant mitral valve disease.

    Galectin 3

    Galectin-3 (Gal-3) is a 26 kDa, 3-galactoside-binding lectin57 found in a wide variety of cells and tissue surfaces that is thought to represent a link between inflammation and fibrosis. Gal-3 is secreted by activated macrophages, especially at sites of fibrosis and fibroblast deposition58 and may therefore play a role in cardiac pathophysiology and act as a surrogate indicator of cardiac remodelling and fibrosis. Expression appears to occur before evidence of heart failure is established, and it may therefore be a particularly useful marker in strategies to predict and prevent advanced disease.36

    Serum Gal-3 levels are increased in myocardial biopsies from AS patients with reduced ejection fraction as well as being associated with adverse outcomes after TAVI.70 71 Raised Gal-3 levels are also detected in the serum of patients with degenerative mitral valve disease.72 In contrast, Gal-3 was not associated with AS severity or functional status in a large, single-centre, population cohort study (COFRASA-GENERAC) of 583 patients with AS over a wide range of severity.73 However, one of the limitations of this study was that a large number of participants had only mild or moderate AS.

    Interestingly, in vitro and preclinical in vivo studies suggest that Gal-3 may have a role in the disease process at the valve level in AS,74 but further studies are required to examine this further.

    MicroRNA

    MicroRNAs (miRNA) are short (approximately 21 nucleotide), non-protein-coding RNAs that are responsible for altering the expression of approximately 30% of the human genome.75 76 miRNAs are highly stable in the circulation, either packaged in extracellular vesicles or microparticles, or bound to molecules such as Argonaute-2. Molecules are released into plasma following the liberation of cell contents secondary to necrosis where they remain highly stable76 and therefore provide an excellent serum marker. Some have tissue-specific expression and play a significant role in cellular growth, proliferation and apoptosis. Significant reduction in myocardial hypertrophy was observed following alteration in the expression of miR-21 by gene knockdown or antisense-mediated depletion77 suggesting that miR-21 is involved in the process of myocardial hypertrophy and may be a possible therapeutic target76 (figure 1). miR-122 levels were found to be downregulated, whereas miR-29c, miR-125b and miR-21 levels were found to be upregulated in studies involving patients with AS.78–81 In a prospective study of 74 patients with severe AS undergoing AVR surgery preoperative plasma levels of miR-133a were found to predict the regression potential of LV hypertrophy after AVR.82 However, these small studies rarely take major confounding factors into account, and another study found limited reproducibility once stratified by history of coronary artery disease.83

    Biomarkers associated with myocardial cell damage/necrosis

    Troponin

    Cardiac troponins would seem a good choice of biomarker to explore, given their release into the circulation only after myocardial cell death—one of the potential mechanisms of decompensation identified earlier. However, minor elevation of cardiac troponin I is relatively common in patients with AS (even those with normal coronary arteries) and is conceivably related to higher LV wall thickness and pulmonary artery systolic pressure.84 Elevated levels of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I and T (hs TnI/TnT) have been associated with advanced LVH, ECG strain, replacement myocardial fibrosis and the need for aortic valve replacement as well as predicting survival after transcatheter aortic valve implantation, poor prognosis in patients with AS and the occurrence of postoperative fatal arrhythmia and cardiac death,85–89 although the latter three groups involve patients who have already developed symptoms and therefore would not support the use of troponin as an earlier marker of decompensation. Troponins therefore appear to be promising biomarkers to evaluate prognosis in VHD, although the overlap between groups is significant and combining these markers with other factors may help.90 Larger prospective studies are needed for further validation before incorporation into clinical practice.

    Metabolomics

    Metabolomics is the systematic study of small molecules in biological fluids.91–93 In general, these are assessed in a broad-based fashion, incorporating numerous potential metabolic molecules and employing advanced statistical methods to identify the signature metabolic profiles in particular cohorts.94 In this manner, metabolomics has the potential to elucidate poorly understood pathophysiological pathways, identify potential therapeutic targets and facilitate risk-stratification in individual patients.94 The metabolic requirements of the myocardium make it feasible that circulating metabolomic profiling could allow quantification of degree of pathological volume or pressure overload in valvular disease, but current knowledge is limited by small sample numbers.95

    Genomic biomarkers

    Data from a genome-wide association study including patients from the Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology consortium identified a single-nucleotide polymorphism in the lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) locus, which significantly correlated with aortic valve calcification.96 These findings were subsequently confirmed for clinical AS.97 Another multicentre study involving 220 patients with mild-to-moderate AS showed that elevated oxidised phospholipids on apolipoprotein B-100 and Lp(a) levels were independently associated with an increased risk of echocardiographically determined AS progression rate, translating to a higher need for AVR accentuated among younger patients.98 Previous randomised controlled trials and a recently published meta-analysis (including five randomised control trials and nine observational studies) have shown no benefit of statins in AS,99 but these genomic and serum studies suggest that trials of therapies likely to increase Lp(a) levels might be more successful.

    Combining multiple biomarkers

    It is likely, given the multiple processes involved in myocardial degeneration, that a combination of biomarkers are likely to be more useful than any single target. There are few existing studies of multiple biomarkers in VHD, and this remains an area for research. One study in AS examined three biomarkers (GDF-15, ST2 and NT-proBNP) in a prospective cohort of 345 intermediate or high-risk surgical patients with severe AS undergoing surgical or percutaneous valve replacement. Individual elevated biomarker levels were associated with higher mortality, elevation of all three biomarkers demonstrated a stronger predictive ability, with a 10-fold higher 1-year and 2-year mortality than those with normal levels.68 A multimarker approach representing diverse biological pathways thus seems likely to be more beneficial.

    Conclusion

    Established biomarkers such as BNP and high-sensitivity troponin can play a partial role in predicting the progression of VHD in patient groups. However, overlap between groups with differing severity and prognosis is significant, and further research will be necessary to determine if meaningful clinical thresholds exist for individual patients. Emerging biomarkers, in particular mi-RNA, GDF-15, ST2, Gal-3 and DNA profiling, hold promise for risk stratification and tailored disease management. Ultimately, it is likely that a combination of biomarkers will be more useful than a single factor, and the development of risk scores combining the serum biomarkers and other parameters, such as cardiac imaging, may prove most beneficial in improving risk stratification in VHD.

    Key messages

    • The likely processes involved in the transition from compensated to decompensated valve disease include cardiomyocyte stress, apoptosis/cell death and replacement fibrosis, which form suitable targets for biomarker development.

    • Natriuretic peptides are the most widely studied biomarkers in valve disease, but they are not specific to valve disease, and there is considerable overlap in serum levels between different clinical groups.

    • Combinations of biomarkers are likely to prove more beneficial than any single marker and have been successfully used in other disease areas and to a limited extent in valve disease

    • Aortic stenosis is the most widely researched individual valve lesion, and useful biomarkers for predicting prognosis include a combination of ST2, growth differentiation factor-15 and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, in addition to high-sensitivity troponins.

    • Future biomarkers will likely include microRNAs and metabolomic markers, as more specific markers of valve decompensation.

    CME credits for Education in Heart

    Education in Heart articles are accredited for CME by various providers. To answer the accompanying multiple choice questions (MCQs) and obtain your credits, click on the ’Take the Test' link on the online version of the article. The MCQs are hosted on BMJ Learning. All users must complete a one-time registration on BMJ Learning and subsequently log in on every visit using their username and password to access modules and their CME record. Accreditation is only valid for 2 years from the date of publication. Printable CME certificates are available to users that achieve the minimum pass mark.

    References

    1. *1.↵
      2. d’Arcy JL ,
      3. Coffey S ,
      4. 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.doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehw229
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    2. 2.↵
      2. d’Arcy JL ,
      3. Prendergast BD ,
      4. Chambers JB , et al
      . Valvular heart disease: the next cardiac epidemic. Heart 2011;97:91–3.doi:10.1136/hrt.2010.205096
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    3. 3.↵
      2. Veinot JP
      . Pathology of inflammatory native valvular heart disease. Cardiovasc Pathol 2006;15:243–51.doi:10.1016/j.carpath.2006.04.007
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    4. 4.↵
      2. Coffey S ,
      3. Cairns BJ ,
      4. Iung B
      . The modern epidemiology of heart valve disease. Heart 2016;102:75–85.doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2014-307020
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    5. 5.↵
      2. Vahanian A ,
      3. Alfieri O ,
      4. Andreotti F , et al
      . Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012). Eur Heart J 2012;33:2451–96.doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehs109
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    6. 6.↵
      2. Ix JH ,
      3. Chertow GM ,
      4. Shlipak MG , et al
      . Association of fetuin-A with mitral annular calcification and aortic stenosis among persons with coronary heart disease: data from the Heart and Soul Study. Circulation 2007;115:2533.doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.682450
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    7. 7.↵
      2. Thum T
      . MicroRNA therapeutics in cardiovascular medicine. EMBO Mol Med 2012;4:3–14.doi:10.1002/emmm.201100191
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    8. 8.↵
      2. Lindman BR ,
      3. Clavel MA ,
      4. Mathieu P , et al
      . Calcific aortic stenosis. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2016;2:16006.doi:10.1038/nrdp.2016.6
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    9. 9.↵
      2. Dweck MR ,
      3. Joshi S ,
      4. 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.doi:10.1186/1532-429X-14-50
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    10. 10.↵
      2. Rajappan K ,
      3. Rimoldi OE ,
      4. Camici PG , et al
      . Functional changes in coronary microcirculation after valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis. Circulation 2003;107:3170–5.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000074211.28917.31
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    11. 11.↵
      2. Rajappan K ,
      3. Rimoldi OE ,
      4. Dutka DP , et al
      . Mechanisms of coronary microcirculatory dysfunction in patients with aortic stenosis and angiographically normal coronary arteries. Circulation 2002;105:470–6.doi:10.1161/hc0402.102931
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    12. 12.↵
      2. Julius BK ,
      3. Spillmann M ,
      4. Vassalli G , et al
      . Angina pectoris in patients with aortic stenosis and normal coronary arteries. Mechanisms and pathophysiological concepts. Circulation 1997;95:892–8.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.95.4.892
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    13. 13.↵
      2. Mutlak D ,
      3. Aronson D ,
      4. Carasso S , et al
      . Frequency, determinants and outcome of pulmonary hypertension in patients with aortic valve stenosis. Am J Med Sci 2012;343:397–401.doi:10.1097/MAJ.0b013e3182309431
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    14. 14.↵
      2. Lancellotti P ,
      3. Magne J ,
      4. Donal E , et al
      . Determinants and prognostic significance of exercise pulmonary hypertension in asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis. Circulation 2012;126:851–9.doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.088427
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    15. 15.↵
      2. Dumesnil JG ,
      3. Shoucri RM ,
      4. Laurenceau JL , et al
      . A mathematical model of the dynamic geometry of the intact left ventricle and its application to clinical data. Circulation 1979;59:1024–34.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.59.5.1024
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    16. 16.↵
      2. Lancellotti P ,
      3. Donal E ,
      4. Magne J , et al
      . Risk stratification in asymptomatic moderate to severe aortic stenosis: the importance of the valvular, arterial and ventricular interplay. Heart 2010;96:1364–71.doi:10.1136/hrt.2009.190942
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    17. 17.↵
      2. Kusunose K ,
      3. Goodman A ,
      4. Parikh R , et al
      . Incremental prognostic value of left ventricular global longitudinal strain in patients with aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2014;7:938–45.doi:10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.114.002041
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    18. 18.↵
      2. Carstensen HG ,
      3. Larsen LH ,
      4. Hassager C , et al
      . Tissue velocities and myocardial deformation in asymptomatic and symptomatic aortic stenosis. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2015;28:969–80.doi:10.1016/j.echo.2015.03.013
      OpenUrl
    19. 19.↵
      2. Cioffi G ,
      3. Faggiano P ,
      4. Vizzardi E , et al
      . Prognostic effect of inappropriately high left ventricular mass in asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis. Heart 2011;97:301–7.doi:10.1136/hrt.2010.192997
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    20. 20.↵
      2. Gerdts E ,
      3. Rossebø AB ,
      4. Pedersen TR , et al
      . Relation of left ventricular mass to prognosis in initially asymptomatic mild to moderate aortic valve stenosis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2015;8:e003644.doi:10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.115.003644
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    21. 21.↵
      2. Hein S ,
      3. Arnon E ,
      4. Kostin S , et al
      . Progression from compensated hypertrophy to failure in the pressure-overloaded human heart: structural deterioration and compensatory mechanisms. Circulation 2003;107:984–91.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000051865.66123.B7
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    22. 22.↵
      2. Dweck MR ,
      3. Joshi S ,
      4. 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.doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2011.03.064
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    23. 23.↵
      2. Maganti K ,
      3. Rigolin VH ,
      4. Sarano ME , et al
      . Valvular heart disease: diagnosis and management. Mayo Clin Proc 2010;85:483–500.doi:10.4065/mcp.2009.0706
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    24. 24.↵
      2. Gaasch WH ,
      3. Zile MR
      . Left ventricular structural remodeling in health and disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:1733–1740.doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2011.07.022
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    25. 25.↵
      2. Carabello BA
      . Progress in mitral and aortic regurgitation. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 2001;43:457–75.doi:10.1053/pcad.2001.24597
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    26. 26.↵
      2. Borer JS ,
      3. Bonow RO
      . Contemporary approach to aortic and mitral regurgitation. Circulation 2003;108:2432–2438.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000096400.00562.A3
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    27. 27.↵
      2. Rigolin VH ,
      3. Bonow RO
      . Hemodynamic characteristics and progression to heart failure in regurgitant lesions. Heart Fail Clin 2006;2:453–60.doi:10.1016/j.hfc.2006.09.009
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    28. 28.↵
      2. Borer JS ,
      3. Bonow RO
      . Contemporary approach to aortic and mitral regurgitation. Circulation 2003;108:2432–8.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000096400.00562.A3
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    29. 29.↵
      2. Enriquez-Sarano M ,
      3. Avierinos JF ,
      4. Messika-Zeitoun D , et al
      . Quantitative determinants of the outcome of asymptomatic mitral regurgitation. N Engl J Med 2005;352:875–83.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa041451
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    30. 30.↵
      2. Stone GW ,
      3. Vahanian AS ,
      4. Adams DH , et al
      . Clinical trial design principles and endpoint definitions for transcatheter mitral valve repair and replacement: part 1: clinical trial design principles: a consensus document from the mitral valve academic research consortium. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015;66:278–307.doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.05.046
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    31. 31.↵
      2. Ahmed MI ,
      3. Gladden JD ,
      4. Litovsky SH , et al
      . Increased oxidative stress and cardiomyocyte myofibrillar degeneration in patients with chronic isolated mitral regurgitation and ejection fraction >60%. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:671–9.doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.08.074
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    32. 32.↵
      2. Kim HK ,
      3. Kim YJ ,
      4. Shin JI , et al
      . Echocardiographic and hemodynamic findings in patients with mitral stenosis undergoing percutaneous mitral commissurotomy comparing those with chronic atrial fibrillation versus those with normal sinus rhythm. Am J Cardiol 2007;100:1153–6.doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.04.060
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    33. 33.↵
      2. Bonow RO ,
      3. Carabello BA ,
      4. Chatterjee K , et al
      . 2008 Focused update incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines 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 (Writing Committee to Revise the 1998 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease): endorsed by the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation 2008;118:e523–661.doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.190748
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    34. 34.↵
      2. Lancellotti P ,
      3. Fattouch K ,
      4. Dulgheru R
      . Targeting the tricuspid valve: A new therapeutic challenge. Arch Cardiovasc Dis 2016;109:1–3.doi:10.1016/j.acvd.2015.11.001
      OpenUrl
    35. 35.↵
      2. Mair J ,
      3. Jaffe A ,
      4. Apple F , et al
      . Cardiac biomarkers. Dis Markers 2015;2015:1–3.doi:10.1155/2015/370569
      OpenUrl
    36. 36.↵
      2. Iqbal N ,
      3. Wentworth B ,
      4. Choudhary R , et al
      . Cardiac biomarkers: new tools for heart failure management. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther 2012;2:147–64.doi:10.3978/j.issn.2223-3652.2012.06.03
      OpenUrl
    37. 37.↵
      2. Gerber IL ,
      3. Stewart RA ,
      4. Legget ME , et al
      . Increased plasma natriuretic peptide levels reflect symptom onset in aortic stenosis. Circulation 2003;107:1884–90.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000060533.79248.0C
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    38. 38.↵
      2. Henri C ,
      3. Dulgheru R ,
      4. Magne J , et al
      . Impact of serial B-type natriuretic peptide changes for predicting outcome in asymptomatic patients with aortic stenosis. Can J Cardiol 2016;32:183–9.doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2015.06.007
      OpenUrlPubMed
    39. *39.↵
      2. Clavel MA ,
      3. Malouf J ,
      4. Michelena HI , et al
      . B-type natriuretic peptide clinical activation in aortic stenosis: impact on long-term survival. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:2016–25.doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.02.581
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    40. 40.↵
      2. Monin JL ,
      3. Lancellotti P ,
      4. Monchi M , et al
      . Risk score for predicting outcome in patients with asymptomatic aortic stenosis. Circulation 2009;120:69–75.doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.808857
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    41. 41.↵
      2. Nessmith MG ,
      3. Fukuta H ,
      4. Brucks S , et al
      . Usefulness of an elevated B-type natriuretic peptide in predicting survival in patients with aortic stenosis treated without surgery. Am J Cardiol 2005;96:1445–8.doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.06.092
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    42. 42.↵
      2. Bergler-Klein J ,
      3. Klaar U ,
      4. Heger M , et al
      . Natriuretic peptides predict symptom-free survival and postoperative outcome in severe aortic stenosis. Circulation 2004;109:2302–2308.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000126825.50903.18
    43. 43.↵
      2. Généreux P ,
      3. Stone GW ,
      4. 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.doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2016.02.057
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    44. 44.↵
      2. Gabriel RS ,
      3. Kerr AJ ,
      4. Sharma V , et al
      . B-type natriuretic peptide and left ventricular dysfunction on exercise echocardiography in patients with chronic aortic regurgitation. Heart 2008;94:897–902.doi:10.1136/hrt.2007.126508
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    45. 45.↵
      2. Pizarro R ,
      3. Bazzino OO ,
      4. Oberti PF , et al
      . Prospective validation of the prognostic usefulness of B-type natriuretic peptide in asymptomatic patients with chronic severe aortic regurgitation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:1705–14.doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2011.07.016
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    46. 46.↵
      2. Weber M ,
      3. Hausen M ,
      4. Arnold R , et al
      . Diagnostic and prognostic value of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) in patients with chronic aortic regurgitation. Int J Cardiol 2008;127:321–7.doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2007.07.174
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    47. 47.↵
      2. Gerber IL ,
      3. Stewart RA ,
      4. French JK , et al
      . Associations between plasma natriuretic peptide levels, symptoms, and left ventricular function in patients with chronic aortic regurgitation. Am J Cardiol 2003;92:755–8.doi:10.1016/S0002-9149(03)00849-X
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    48. 48.↵
      2. Sutton TM ,
      3. Stewart RA ,
      4. Gerber IL , et al
      . Plasma natriuretic peptide levels increase with symptoms and severity of mitral regurgitation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:2280–7.doi:10.1016/S0735-1097(03)00486-8
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    49. *49.↵
      2. Pizarro R ,
      3. Bazzino OO ,
      4. Oberti PF , et al
      . Prospective validation of the prognostic usefulness of brain natriuretic peptide in asymptomatic patients with chronic severe mitral regurgitation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54:1099–106.doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.06.013
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    50. 50.↵
      2. Detaint D ,
      3. Messika-Zeitoun D ,
      4. Avierinos JF , et al
      . B-type natriuretic peptide in organic mitral regurgitation: determinants and impact on outcome. Circulation 2005;111:2391–7.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000164269.80908.9D
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    51. 51.↵
      2. Wöhrle J ,
      3. Karakas M ,
      4. Trepte U , et al
      . Midregional-proAtrial natriuretic peptide and high sensitive troponin T strongly predict adverse outcome in patients undergoing percutaneous repair of mitral valve regurgitation. PLoS One 2015;10:e0137464.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0137464
    52. 52.↵
      2. Clavel MA ,
      3. Tribouilloy C ,
      4. Vanoverschelde JL , et al
      . Association of B-Type natriuretic peptide with survival in patients with degenerative mitral regurgitation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;68:1297–307.doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2016.06.047
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    53. 53.↵
      2. Eryol NK ,
      3. Dogan A ,
      4. Ozdogru I , et al
      . The relationship between the level of plasma B-type natriuretic peptide and mitral stenosis. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2007;23:569–74.doi:10.1007/s10554-006-9174-8
      OpenUrlPubMed
    54. 54.↵
      2. Sharma V ,
      3. Stewart RA ,
      4. Zeng I , et al
      . Comparison of atrial and brain natriuretic peptide for the assessment of mitral stenosis. Heart Lung Circ 2011;20:517–24.doi:10.1016/j.hlc.2011.03.112
      OpenUrlPubMed
    55. 55.↵
      2. Yoon CH ,
      3. Zo JH ,
      4. Kim YJ , et al
      . B-type natriuretic Peptide in isolated severe tricuspid regurgitation: determinants and impact on outcome. J Cardiovasc Ultrasound 2010;18:139–45.doi:10.4250/jcu.2010.18.4.139
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    56. 56.↵
      2. Vassiliadis E ,
      3. Barascuk N ,
      4. Didangelos A , et al
      . Novel cardiac-specific biomarkers and the cardiovascular continuum. Biomark Insights 2012;7:45–57.doi:10.4137/BMI.S9536
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    57. 57.↵
      2. Collinson P
      . The role of cardiac biomarkers in cardiovascular disease risk assessment. Curr Opin Cardiol 2014;29:366–71.doi:10.1097/HCO.0000000000000081
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    58. 58.↵
      2. Loncar G ,
      3. Omersa D ,
      4. Cvetinovic N , et al
      . Emerging biomarkers in heart failure and cardiac cachexia. Int J Mol Sci 2014;15:23878–96.doi:10.3390/ijms151223878
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    59. 59.↵
      2. Kempf T ,
      3. Eden M ,
      4. Strelau J , et al
      . The transforming growth factor-beta superfamily member growth-differentiation factor-15 protects the heart from ischemia/reperfusion injury. Circ Res 2006;98:351–60.doi:10.1161/01.RES.0000202805.73038.48
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    60. 60.↵
      2. Santhanakrishnan R ,
      3. Chong JP ,
      4. Ng TP , et al
      . Growth differentiation factor 15, ST2, high-sensitivity troponin T, and N-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide in heart failure with preserved vs. reduced ejection fraction. Eur J Heart Fail 2012;14:1338–47.doi:10.1093/eurjhf/hfs130
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    61. 61.↵
      2. Lok SI ,
      3. Winkens B ,
      4. Goldschmeding R , et al
      . Circulating growth differentiation factor-15 correlates with myocardial fibrosis in patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy and decreases rapidly after left ventricular assist device support. Eur J Heart Fail 2012;14:1249–56.doi:10.1093/eurjhf/hfs120
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    62. 62.↵
      2. Stahrenberg R ,
      3. Edelmann F ,
      4. Mende M , et al
      . The novel biomarker growth differentiation factor 15 in heart failure with normal ejection fraction. Eur J Heart Fail 2010;12:1309–16.doi:10.1093/eurjhf/hfq151
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    63. 63.↵
      2. Eggers KM ,
      3. Kempf T ,
      4. Wallentin L , et al
      . Change in growth differentiation factor 15 concentrations over time independently predicts mortality in community-dwelling elderly individuals. Clin Chem 2013;59:1091–8.doi:10.1373/clinchem.2012.201210
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    64. 64.↵
      2. Wallentin L ,
      3. Zethelius B ,
      4. Berglund L , et al
      . GDF-15 for prognostication of cardiovascular and cancer morbidity and mortality in men. PLoS One 2013;8:e78797.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0078797
    65. 65.↵
      2. Xanthakis V ,
      3. Larson MG ,
      4. Wollert KC , et al
      . Association of novel biomarkers of cardiovascular stress with left ventricular hypertrophy and dysfunction: implications for screening. J Am Heart Assoc 2013;2:e000399.doi:10.1161/JAHA.113.000399
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    66. 66.↵
      2. Heringlake M ,
      3. Charitos EI ,
      4. Gatz N , et al
      . Growth differentiation factor 15: a novel risk marker adjunct to the EuroSCORE for risk stratification in cardiac surgery patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:672–81.doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2012.09.059
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    67. 67.↵
      2. Januzzi JL ,
      3. Peacock WF ,
      4. Maisel AS , et al
      . Measurement of the interleukin family member ST2 in patients with acute dyspnea: results from the PRIDE (Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide Investigation of Dyspnea in the Emergency Department) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:607–13.doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2007.05.014
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    68. *68.↵
      2. Lindman BR ,
      3. Breyley JG ,
      4. Schilling JD , et al
      . Prognostic utility of novel biomarkers of cardiovascular stress in patients with aortic stenosis undergoing valve replacement. Heart 2015;101:1382–8.doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2015-307742
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    69. 69.↵
      2. Lancellotti P ,
      3. Dulgheru R ,
      4. Magne J , et al
      . Elevated plasma soluble ST2 Is associated with heart failure symptoms and outcome in aortic stenosis. PLoS One 2015;10:e0138940.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138940
    70. 70.↵
      2. Sharma UC ,
      3. Pokharel S ,
      4. van Brakel TJ , et al
      . Galectin-3 marks activated macrophages in failure-prone hypertrophied hearts and contributes to cardiac dysfunction. Circulation 2004;110:3121–8.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000147181.65298.4D
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    71. 71.↵
      2. Baldenhofer G ,
      3. Zhang K ,
      4. Spethmann S , et al
      . Galectin-3 predicts short- and long-term outcome in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Int J Cardiol 2014;177:912–7.doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.10.010
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    72. 72.↵
      2. Sakarin S ,
      3. Rungsipipat A ,
      4. Surachetpong SD
      . Galectin-3 in cardiac muscle and circulation of dogs with degenerative mitral valve disease. J Vet Cardiol 2016;18:34–46.doi:10.1016/j.jvc.2015.10.007
      OpenUrl
    73. 73.↵
      2. Arangalage D ,
      3. Nguyen V ,
      4. Robert T , et al
      . Determinants and prognostic value of Galectin-3 in patients with aortic valve stenosis. Heart 2016;102:862–8.doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2015-308873
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    74. 74.↵
      2. Sádaba JR ,
      3. Martínez-Martínez E ,
      4. Arrieta V , et al
      . Role for Galectin-3 in Calcific Aortic Valve Stenosis. J Am Heart Assoc 2016;5:e004360.doi:10.1161/JAHA.116.004360
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    75. 75.↵
      2. Devaux Y ,
      3. Stammet P ,
      4. Friberg H , et al
      . MicroRNAs: new biomarkers and therapeutic targets after cardiac arrest? Crit Care 2015;19:54.doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0767-2
      OpenUrl
    76. 76.↵
      2. Janković R ,
      3. Marković D ,
      4. Savić N , et al
      . Beyond the limits: clinical utility of novel cardiac biomarkers. Biomed Res Int 2015;2015:1–8.doi:10.1155/2015/187384
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    77. 77.↵
      2. Ji R ,
      3. Cheng Y ,
      4. Yue J , et al
      . MicroRNA expression signature and antisense-mediated depletion reveal an essential role of MicroRNA in vascular neointimal lesion formation. Circ Res 2007;100:1579–88.doi:10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.106.141986
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    78. 78.↵
      2. Beaumont J ,
      3. López B ,
      4. Hermida N , et al
      . microRNA-122 down-regulation may play a role in severe myocardial fibrosis in human aortic stenosis through TGF-β1 up-regulation. Clin Sci 2014;126:497–506.doi:10.1042/CS20130538
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    79. 79.↵
      2. Derda AA ,
      3. Thum S ,
      4. Lorenzen JM , et al
      . Blood-based microRNA signatures differentiate various forms of cardiac hypertrophy. Int J Cardiol 2015;196:115–22.doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.05.185
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    80. 80.↵
      2. Ohukainen P ,
      3. Syväranta S ,
      4. Näpänkangas J , et al
      . MicroRNA-125b and chemokine CCL4 expression are associated with calcific aortic valve disease. Ann Med 2015;47:423–9.doi:10.3109/07853890.2015.1059955
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    81. *81.↵
      2. Villar AV ,
      3. García R ,
      4. Merino D , et al
      . Myocardial and circulating levels of microRNA-21 reflect left ventricular fibrosis in aortic stenosis patients. Int J Cardiol 2013;167:2875–81.doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.07.021
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    82. 82.↵
      2. García R ,
      3. Villar AV ,
      4. Cobo M , et al
      . Circulating levels of miR-133a predict the regression potential of left ventricular hypertrophy after valve replacement surgery in patients with aortic stenosis. J Am Heart Assoc 2013;2:e000211.doi:10.1161/JAHA.113.000211
    83. 83.↵
      2. Coffey S ,
      3. Williams MJ ,
      4. Phillips LV , et al
      . Circulating microRNA profiling needs further refinement before clinical use in patients with aortic stenosis. J Am Heart Assoc 2015;4:e002150.doi:10.1161/JAHA.115.002150
    84. 84.↵
      2. Nunes JP ,
      3. Mota Garcia JM ,
      4. Farinha RM , et al
      . Cardiac troponin I in aortic valve disease. Int J Cardiol 2003;89:281–5.doi:10.1016/S0167-5273(02)00502-8
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    85. 85.↵
      2. Røsjø H ,
      3. Andreassen J ,
      4. Edvardsen T , et al
      . Prognostic usefulness of circulating high-sensitivity troponin T in aortic stenosis and relation to echocardiographic indexes of cardiac function and anatomy. Am J Cardiol 2011;108:88–91.doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2011.02.346
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    86. 86.↵
      2. Frank D ,
      3. Stark S ,
      4. Lutz M , et al
      . Preprocedural high-sensitive troponin predicts survival after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Int J Cardiol 2013;169:e38–e39.doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2013.08.108
      OpenUrl
    87. *87.↵
      2. Chin CW ,
      3. Shah AS ,
      4. McAllister DA , et al
      . High-sensitivity troponin I concentrations are a marker of an advanced hypertrophic response and adverse outcomes in patients with aortic stenosis. Eur Heart J 2014;35:2312–21.doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehu189
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    88. 88.↵
      2. Shah AS ,
      3. Chin CW ,
      4. Vassiliou V , et al
      . Left ventricular hypertrophy with strain and aortic stenosis. Circulation 2014;130:1607–16.doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.011085
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    89. 89.↵
      2. Saito T ,
      3. Hojo Y ,
      4. Hirose M , et al
      . High-sensitivity troponin T is a prognostic marker for patients with aortic stenosis after valve replacement surgery. J Cardiol 2013;61:342–7.doi:10.1016/j.jjcc.2013.01.005
      OpenUrl
    90. 90.↵
      2. Chin CW ,
      3. Messika-Zeitoun D ,
      4. Shah AS , et al
      . A clinical risk score of myocardial fibrosis predicts adverse outcomes in aortic stenosis. Eur Heart J 2016;37:713–23.doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv525
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    91. 91.↵
      2. Nicholson JK
      . Global systems biology, personalized medicine and molecular epidemiology. Mol Syst Biol 2006;2:52.doi:10.1038/msb4100095
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    92. 92.↵
      2. Nicholson JK ,
      3. Connelly J ,
      4. Lindon JC , et al
      . Metabonomics: a platform for studying drug toxicity and gene function. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2002;1:153–61.doi:10.1038/nrd728
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    93. 93.↵
      2. Nicholson JK ,
      3. Lindon JC ,
      4. Holmes E
      . ’Metabonomics': understanding the metabolic responses of living systems to pathophysiological stimuli via multivariate statistical analysis of biological NMR spectroscopic data. Xenobiotica 1999;29:1181–9.doi:10.1080/004982599238047
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    94. 94.↵
      2. Dona AC ,
      3. Coffey S ,
      4. Figtree G
      . Translational and emerging clinical applications of metabolomics in cardiovascular disease diagnosis and treatment. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2016;23:1578–89.doi:10.1177/2047487316645469
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    95. 95.↵
      2. Mourino-Alvarez L ,
      3. Baldan-Martin M ,
      4. Gonzalez-Calero L , et al
      . Patients with calcific aortic stenosis exhibit systemic molecular evidence of ischemia, enhanced coagulation, oxidative stress and impaired cholesterol transport. Int J Cardiol 2016;225:99–106.doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.09.089
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    96. 96.↵
      2. Thanassoulis G ,
      3. Campbell CY ,
      4. Owens DS , et al
      . Genetic associations with valvular calcification and aortic stenosis. N Engl J Med 2013;368:503–12.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1109034
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    97. 97.↵
      2. Cairns BJ ,
      3. Coffey S ,
      4. Travis RC , et al
      . A replicated, genome-wide significant association of aortic stenosis with a genetic variant for lipoprotein(a): meta-analysis of published and novel data. Circulation 2017;135:1181–3.doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.026103
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    98. 98.↵
      2. Capoulade R ,
      3. Chan KL ,
      4. Yeang C , et al
      . Oxidized phospholipids, lipoprotein(a), and progression of calcific aortic valve stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015;66:1236–46.doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.07.020
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    99. 99.↵
      2. Zhao Y ,
      3. Nicoll R ,
      4. He YH , et al
      . The effect of statins therapy in aortic stenosis: meta-analysis comparison data of RCTs and observationals. Data Brief 2016;7:357–61.doi:10.1016/j.dib.2016.02.045
      OpenUrl
    View Abstract

    Footnotes

    • Contributors Drs SKMG and SC reviewed the research papers and drafted the paper; SGM and BDP critically reviewed the content and significantly edited the manuscript.

    • Funding SGM and SKMG are supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre,Oxford

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Author note References which include a * have been identified as a key reference for this paper.