Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the evidence for common therapeutic controversies in the medical management of valvular heart disease (VHD). DATA SOURCES: A literature search of PubMed (inception to December 2020) was performed using the terms angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and aortic stenosis (AS); and adrenergic β-antagonists and aortic valve regurgitation (AR) or mitral stenosis (MS). STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses conducted in humans and published in English that reported ≥1 clinical outcome were included. DATA SYNTHESIS: Nine articles were included: 3 RCTs and 1 meta-analysis for ACE inhibitors/ARBs in AS, 1 RCT for β-blockers in AR, and 4 RCTs for β-blockers in MS. Evidence suggests that ACE inhibitors/ARBs do not increase the risk of adverse outcomes in patients with AS but may delay valve replacement. β-Blockers do not appear to worsen outcomes in patients with chronic AR and may improve left-ventricular function in patients with a reduced ejection fraction. β-Blockers do not improve and may actually worsen exercise tolerance in patients with MS in sinus rhythm. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: ACE inhibitors/ARBs and β-blockers can likely be safely used in patients with AS or AR, respectively, who have a compelling indication. There is insufficient evidence to recommend routine use of β-blockers in patients with MS without atrial fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS: Common beliefs about the medical treatment of VHD are not supported by high-quality data. There remains a need for larger-scale RCTs in the medical management of VHD.