Talk:Valvular heart disease

message: Hi folks, I'm a 4th year medical student and I'll be working on updates to this page as a part of an elective course at MUSC. I will be using the wikiproject medicine manual of style, and will be sure that my sources adhere to the WP:MEDRS. Specifically I think the page probably should be rearranged according to the content sections described in the WP:MEDMOS. I'm not sure if these sections should be sub-sectioned based on the valve involved or not, if anyone has any strong opinions, feel free to let me know. I think the table in the comparison was a good thought, but it seems a little difficult to read given the size.
I will prioritize updating the diagnosis, treatment, and epidemiology sections in particular. If available, I think chest X-rays and EKGs could be helpful multimedia to add in the diagnosis section.
I plan on updating treatment guidelines based on the 2017 updated Guideline for the Management of Patients with Valvular Heart Disease. I will use additional sources that include Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine (20th ed) and the 2019 AATS/ACC/ASE/SCAI/STSExpert Consensus Systems of Care Document: A Proposal to Optimize Care for Patients With Valvular Heart Disease.
I will include information about the diseases that will be relevant to the general public (especially in causes, signs/symptoms subheadings), but will try not to restate what is already in the articles for the specific valvular disorders. I'll continue to link to other existing Wikipedia articles that are relevant. I'll also focus on using clear language and avoiding medical jargon, and will review some patient-directed resources that can help me rephrase if necessary.
Segregg (talk) 20:43, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work Plan 2019 

message: The following content was removed:
:In March 29, 2007, pergolide, a dopamine agonist used in treatment of Parkinson's disease and also off label for Restless legs syndrome (RLS), was withdrawn from the US market due to implication in valvular heart disease . The withdrawal was based on findings published in New England Journal of Medicine, confirming previous reports associating pergolide with increased risk of regurgitation of the mitral valve, tricuspid valve, and aortic valve of the heart. Cabergoline, a similar ergot-derived dopamine agonist, is still marketed in EU. 
:Ergot derivatives (ergotamines) have been implicated in fibrosis not only of the heart valves but also of the pleura and retroperitoneum  and possibly other locations.
This is a typical Wikipedia phenomenon - just because this discovery was made after 2001 it is mentioned with massive prominence in an article that is otherwise nothing more than a list. I am removing it temporarily per WP:WEIGHT considerations until the page is more mature. JFW | T@lk 11:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Content removed

message: ... are a lot shorter - just 39 pages.  JFW | T@lk 12:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  European guidelines 

message: Skumin syndrome was added to the intro. Perhaps it ought to be mentioned somewhere, but not in the lead. JFW | T@lk 06:17, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems  is the relevant reference. On the whole, I don't think the eponym is in widespread use outside Russia. JFWUser_talk:Jfdwolff|T@lk 06:18, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Skumin syndrome 

message: A table of the 'Valvular heart lesions associated with high maternal and fetal risk during pregnancy' seems like a better format than the list. 
I realize that the citations in the pregnancy section have increasing numbers but all point to the same source.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Triggity (talk • contribs) 16:53, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pregnancy 

message: Bigger than ever:
* doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000029 (executive summary)
* doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000031 (full report)
The DOIs will be switched on eventually... JFW | T@lk 06:18, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  AHA/ACC guideline 2014 

message: doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.016006 JFW | T@lk 09:05, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review of drug therapy 

message: doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000503 JFW | T@lk 09:42, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated American guideline 

message: Overall, this article is written well and in a way that reads simply. I did not feel that the content was biased at any point when reading and the sources provided are reliable. Additionally, one of the strengths of this article is the organization of the contents and succinct explanations of the different types of valvular heart diseases. The lead section is broad and to the point. I actually prefer that the written portion is brief and that this section ends with a very organized content table that leads the reader into a very clear outline of the main points made in the article.
You have done an excellent job adding many reputable sources to this page. I do think that there are large parts of discussion where no sources have been included (examples: “Types” lead introduction, “aortic and mitral valve disorders”). Some of this is due to a more definitional description of terms, like “stenosis”, but I do think there is room for improvement here. A few sections could still be expanded upon, such as “Dysplasia” and “Epidemiology”, but overall, the content of this article is very helpful.
You discussed in your talk page the comparison table is difficult to read and I agree with you. The content within it is helpful, but also very dense and it seems to be overwhelming and in ways takes away from the rest of the clean, concise aspects of this article.
Finally, I really liked reading the "treatment" section. The opening line is very succinct and easy to read, while each section that discusses the specific diseases is clear and to the point. Bdbwiki1990 (talk) 15:26, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review for Segregg 

message: I am planning on removing this section from the page and redistributing the information elsewhere in the page, but wanted to leave the section here in case anyone wanted to reference it or put it back in. -Segregg (talk) 16:53, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Comparison

message: Hello: I think the classification is wrong. It's the other way around. --Ortisa (talk) 15:39, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diagnostic classification of aortic stenosis