Comparative study of bicuspid vs. tricuspid aortic valve stenosis.

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). 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 cm2/m2, 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/m2, 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). 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.

Huntley GD ，Thaden JJ ，Alsidawi S ，Michelena HI ，Maleszewski JJ ，Edwards WD ，Scott CG ，Pislaru SV ，Pellikka PA ，Greason KL ，Ammash NM ，Malouf JF ，Enriquez-Sarano M ，Nkomo VT ... -  《-》

Computed tomography characteristics of the aortic valve and the geometry of SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve in patients with bicuspid aortic valve disease.

Kawamori H ，Yoon SH ，Chakravarty T ，Maeno Y ，Kashif M ，Israr S ，Abramowitz Y ，Mangat G ，Miyasaka M ，Rami T ，Kazuno Y ，Takahashi N ，Jilaihawi H ，Nakamura M ，Cheng W ，Friedman J ，Berman D ，Sharma R ，Makkar RR ... -  《-》

Long-Term Recovery of Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction after Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease.

Background Long-term prognosis of patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease and poor left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) who underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) is unknown. We aimed to analyze the recovery of LVEF and incidence of adverse events after AVR in patients with BAV and poor LVEF. Materials and Methods A total of 90 consecutive BAV patients (mean age 57 ± 10 years, 89% male) with baseline LVEF ≤40% underwent an isolated AVR between January 1, 1995, and June 30, 2008, and served as our study population. Follow-up data (800 patient-years) were obtained for all 90 hospital survivors. A subgroup of patients who underwent AVR for BAV stenosis (Group aortic stenosis [AS], n = 70) was compared with those who underwent AVR for BAV regurgitation (Group aortic regurgitation [AR], n = 20). Primary end point was the recovery of LVEF in AS Group versus AR Group. Secondary end points were survival and freedom from adverse cardiac events (i.e., cardiac-related death and need for reinterventions due to persisting heart failure). Results There was a significant increase in LVEF (mean follow-up 9.0 ± 5 years) in AS versus AR Group (i.e., 32 ± 7% [baseline] and 53 ± 9% [follow-up], p < 0.001 in AS Group vs. 33 ± 7% [baseline] and 38 ± 13% [follow-up], p = 0.07 in AR Group). Recovery rate of LVEF was significantly higher in AS Group versus AR Group (i.e., 2.8 percentage points (pp)/year vs. 0.7 pp/year, respectively). In Group AS, 86% of patients were responders, whereas in Group AR, only 30% (p < 0.001). The subjects in Group AR did not show a difference between baseline and follow-up left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) (baseline 61 ± 12 vs. follow-up 58 ± 8, p = 0.813), whereas in Group AS, there was a significant difference of LVEDD (baseline 56 ± 7 vs. follow-up 54 ± 6 mm, p = 0.019). Ten-year survival was 76 ± 6.5% in AS Group versus 78 ± 11% in AR Group (p = 0.3). Prevalence of late adverse cardiac events was 7% in AS Group versus 40% in AR Group (p = 0.03). Conclusion The recovery of reduced LVEF after AVR surgery is significantly impaired in patients with BAV regurgitation as compared with BAV stenosis.

Disha K ，Espinoza A ，Rouman M ，Secknus MA ，Kuntze T ，Girdauskas E ... -  《-》

Comparison of Clinical and Echocardiographic Features of Asymptomatic Patients With Stenotic Bicuspid Versus Tricuspid Aortic Valves.

The clinical and imaging differences between bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) patients with medically managed asymptomatic moderate-to-severe aortic stenosis (AS) have not been studied previously. We aim to characterize these differences and their clinical outcomes in this study. A retrospective observational study was conducted on 836 consecutive cases of isolated asymptomatic moderate-to-severe AS, with median follow-up of 3.4 years. Clinical and echocardiographic characteristics were compared between BAV and TAV patients. Subgroup analysis stratified by AS severity were performed. Survival analysis of all-cause mortality was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards model. Compared to BAV patients, TAV patients were older (76 ± 11 vs 55 ± 16 years, p <0.001) and had more co-morbidities including hypertension (78% vs 56%; p <0.001), diabetes (41% vs 24%; p <0.001), and chronic kidney disease (20% vs 3%; p = 0.001). TAV patients had less severe aortic valve disease than BAV patients, with a higher aortic valve area index (0.71 ± 0.20 cm2/m2 vs 0.61 ± 0.18 cm2/m2, p <0.001) and less aortic dilation (sinotubular junction: 23.7 ± 4.0 mm vs 26.9 ± 4.8 mm, p <0.001; mid-ascending aorta: 31.4 ± 4.7 mm vs 36.3 ± 6.3 mm, p <0.001). TAV patients were more likely to have eccentric left ventricular hypertrophy and less likely to have a normal geometry (p = 0.003). Competing risk analysis identified increased age (hazard ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.05, p <0.001) and LVEF (hazard ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.97 to 0.99, p <0.001) as independent risk factors of all-cause mortality. Valve morphology was not a significant independent risk factor for aortic valve replacement or mortality. In conclusion, asymptomatic TAV patients had more cardiovascular risk factors, less severe aortic valve disease, less sinotubular and mid-ascending aortic dilation, more severe LV remodeling.

Sia CH ，Ho JS ，Chua JJ ，Tan BY ，Ngiam NJ ，Chew N ，Sim HW ，Chen R ，Lee CH ，Yeo TC ，Kong WK ，Poh KK ... -  《-》

Less pronounced reverse left ventricular remodeling in patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared to tricuspid aortic stenosis.

Xiong TY ，Wang X ，Li YJ ，Liao YB ，Zhao ZG ，Wei X ，Xu YN ，Zheng MX ，Zhou X ，Peng Y ，Wei JF ，Feng Y ，Chen M ... -  《-》