We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Comparative study of bicuspid vs. tricuspid aortic valve stenosis.
- Authors
Huntley, Geoffrey D.; Thaden, Jeremy J.; Alsidawi, Said; Michelena, Hector I.; Maleszewski, Joseph J.; Edwards, William D.; Scott, Christopher G.; Pislaru, Sorin V.; Pellikka, Patricia A.; Greason, Kevin L.; Ammash, Naser M.; Malouf, Joseph F.; Enriquez-Sarano, Maurice; Nkomo, Vuyisile T.
- Abstract
Aims To examine differences and similarities in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) stenosis occurring during the same age and whether any differences impact outcomes following aortic valve replacement (AVR). Methods and results An age-matched cohort of 198 BAV stenosis and 198 TAV stenosis patients was identified from 888 consecutive patients undergoing AVR for severe AS. Mean age 68 ± 6 years; 68% male. Patients with BAV were less likely to have multiple comorbidities, as measured by the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) >2 (3 vs. 10%, P = 0.007). Indexed aortic valve area (0.44 ± 0.09 vs. 0.42 ± 0.08 cm#178;/m#178;, P = 0.17) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were similar (62 ± 11 vs. 61 ± 12%, P = 0.12), but E/e' ≥15 (46 vs. 66%, P = 0.0002) was less common in BAV stenosis. A tissue aortic valve prosthesis was more commonly utilized in both groups (81 vs. 78%, P = 0.54). Overall indexed effective orifice area was larger in BAV compared with TAV (1.08 ± 0.33 vs. 0.96 ± 0.25 cm²/m#178;, P = 0.0008). Five-year survival following AVR was lower in TAV compared with BAV stenosis (61 vs. 79%, P = 0.02). Independent predictors of survival following AVR were LVEF < 50% [hazard ratio (HR): 4.8, P = 0.0005], CCI > 2 (HR: 3.1, P = 0.015), effective orifice area index ≤0.85 cm²/m² (HR: 2.5, P = 0.004), and bioprosthesis (HR: 3.7, P = 0.02). Conclusion In an age-matched cohort, TAV compared with BAV stenosis is associated with greater prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and cardiac impairment and worse survival after AVR.
- Subjects
AORTIC stenosis; CARDIOVASCULAR diseases risk factors; COMPARATIVE studies; HEART valves; HEART valve surgery; TREATMENT effectiveness; PROPORTIONAL hazards models; DATA analysis software; DESCRIPTIVE statistics
- Publication
European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging, 2018, Vol 19, Issue 1, p3
- ISSN
2047-2404
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1093/ehjci/jex211