Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Valve cuspidity: A risk factor for aortic valve repair?


Holubec, Tomas; Zacek, Pavel; Jamaliramin, Mostafa; Emmert, Maxmilian Y; Tuna, Martin; Nedbal, Pavel; Dominik, Jan; Harrer, Jan; Falk, Volkmar; Vojacek, Jan (2014). Valve cuspidity: A risk factor for aortic valve repair? Journal of Cardiac Surgery, 29(5):585-592.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze short- and mid-term results after aortic valve (AV) repair with particular regard to the impact of valve cuspidity (bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valve).
METHODS: One hundred patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) undergoing aortic valve repair between November 2007 and October 2012 were included in the study. Sixty patients had bicuspid AV (BAV group; 11 females) and 40 patients had tricuspid AV (TAV group; 13 females). AR > grade 2 was present in 47 (78%) patients in the BAV and in 35 (88%) patients in the TAV group. Follow-up was complete in 100% and median was 25 months.
RESULTS: Isolated aortic valve repair was performed in 27 (45%) of BAV patients and in six (15%) of TAV patients. Replacement of the ascending aorta and/or aortic root was performed in 33 (55%) of BAV patients and in 34 (86%) of TAV patients. There was no death within 30 days postoperatively, while two patients died (TAV group) during the follow-up period. There was no statistical difference between BAV and TAV groups with regard to the survival (100 ± 0% vs. 95 ± 4%, p = 0.102), the three-year freedom from AV-related reoperation (90 ± 5% vs. 89 ± 6%, p = 0.456), and the three-year freedom from AR grade > 2 (86 ± 6% vs. 82 ± 7%, p = 0.866), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates no difference in mid-term results after regurgitant bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valve repair, suggesting that bicuspid valve may not be a risk factor for aortic valve repair.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze short- and mid-term results after aortic valve (AV) repair with particular regard to the impact of valve cuspidity (bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valve).
METHODS: One hundred patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) undergoing aortic valve repair between November 2007 and October 2012 were included in the study. Sixty patients had bicuspid AV (BAV group; 11 females) and 40 patients had tricuspid AV (TAV group; 13 females). AR > grade 2 was present in 47 (78%) patients in the BAV and in 35 (88%) patients in the TAV group. Follow-up was complete in 100% and median was 25 months.
RESULTS: Isolated aortic valve repair was performed in 27 (45%) of BAV patients and in six (15%) of TAV patients. Replacement of the ascending aorta and/or aortic root was performed in 33 (55%) of BAV patients and in 34 (86%) of TAV patients. There was no death within 30 days postoperatively, while two patients died (TAV group) during the follow-up period. There was no statistical difference between BAV and TAV groups with regard to the survival (100 ± 0% vs. 95 ± 4%, p = 0.102), the three-year freedom from AV-related reoperation (90 ± 5% vs. 89 ± 6%, p = 0.456), and the three-year freedom from AR grade > 2 (86 ± 6% vs. 82 ± 7%, p = 0.866), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates no difference in mid-term results after regurgitant bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valve repair, suggesting that bicuspid valve may not be a risk factor for aortic valve repair.

Statistics

Citations

5 citations in Web of Science®
6 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:September 2014
Deposited On:19 Feb 2015 08:22
Last Modified:08 Dec 2017 10:56
Publisher:Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.
ISSN:0886-0440
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/jocs.12382
PubMed ID:24919866

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher