Key result
High postoperative peak pressure gradient after BAV valvuloplasty does not impact 5-year aortic regurgitation risk.
Why the study?
Aortic valvuloplasty for bicuspid aortic valve carries a risk of postoperative stenosis, and the haemodynamic differences and clinical impact of higher postoperative gradients were unclear.
Does a higher postoperative pressure gradient affect mid-term outcomes after aortic valvuloplasty for bicuspid aortic valve?
Cohort (n=112)
Does a higher postoperative pressure gradient affect mid-term outcomes after aortic valvuloplasty for bicuspid aortic valve?
Absolute Event Rate: 94.4% vs 94.4%
p-value: p=0.749
While aortic valvuloplasty for bicuspid aortic valve carries a risk of higher postoperative pressure gradients compared to tricuspid valves, a peak gradient ≥20 mmHg does not adversely affect 5-year clinical outcomes.
High gradients should not deter aortic valvuloplasty in bicuspid valves; leaves open need for larger prospective studies on durability.
Background: Aortic valvuloplasty for bicuspid aortic valve carries a risk of postoperative stenosis. We evaluated the haemodynamic differences between aortic valvuloplasty for bicuspid aortic valve, tricuspid aortic valve, and aortic valve replacement by echocardiography. We also assessed whether a higher postoperative pressure gradient affects the outcomes of aortic valvuloplasty for bicuspid aortic valve. Methods: From 2014 to 2021, patients undergoing aortic valvuloplasty were classified into aortic valvuloplasty for bicuspid aortic valve (Group-PB) and aortic valvuloplasty for tricuspid aortic valve (Group-PT). We also enrolled patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (Group-R) between 2002 and 2021. Mid-term outcomes were compared within Group-PB based on peak pressure gradients of ≥20 mmHg (subgroup-H) and <20 mmHg (subgroup-L). Results: Group-PB included 42 patients and Group-PT included 70 patients. Both 7-day and 1-year echocardiography showed the highest peak/mean pressure gradients in Group-PB (n = 41) and the lowest values in Group-PT (n = 67). Propensity scoring analysis yielded similar results to an unadjusted analysis. The mid-term outcomes were not significantly different between subgroup-H (n = 20) and subgroup-L (n = 22), with rates of freedom from aortic regurgitation >II at 5 years of 94.4% vs. 94.4% (p = 0.749) and freedom from reoperation of 94.4% vs. 100.0% (p = 0.317), respectively. Conclusions: Aortic valvuloplasty for tricuspid aortic valve shows favourable valve function in the early postoperative period, whereas aortic valvuloplasty for bicuspid aortic valve has a risk of postoperative stenosis. However, a high pressure gradient (peak pressure gradient of ≥20 mmHg) after aortic valvuloplasty for bicuspid aortic valve does not impact mid-term outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saku et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Aortic Regurgitation in Patients with Bicuspid Aortic Valve (n=112). Aortic valvuloplasty for bicuspid aortic valve vs. Aortic valvuloplasty for tricuspid aortic valve was evaluated on Freedom from aortic regurgitation >II at 5 years (p=0.749). A high postoperative peak pressure gradient (≥20 mmHg) after aortic valvuloplasty for bicuspid aortic valve did not impact 5-year freedom from aortic regurgitation >II (94.4% vs 94.4%, p=0.749).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: