Key result
Severe bicuspid AS presents with a ~30% higher normal-flow-high-gradient pattern prevalence than severe tricuspid AS.
Why the study?
The flow-gradient pattern characteristics and associated factors in severe bicuspid AS compared with severe tricuspid AS were not well defined.
Do flow-gradient patterns and associated structural parameters differ between severe bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis?
Cross-Sectional (n=252)
No
Do flow-gradient patterns and associated structural parameters differ between severe bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis?
Severe bicuspid aortic stenosis exhibits distinct flow-gradient patterns compared to tricuspid AS, characterized by a higher prevalence of normal-flow-high-gradient patterns and a mismatch between geometric and effective orifice areas influenced by aortic structural characteristics.
Bicuspid AS may warrant phenotype-specific flow assessment; leaves open impact on grading thresholds and outcomes.
BACKGROUND: We investigated the flow-gradient pattern characteristics and associated factors in severe bicuspid aortic stenosis (AS) compared with severe tricuspid AS. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 252 patients with severe AS (115 bicuspid vs. 137 tricuspid) who underwent aortic valve (AV) replacement were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were classified into 4 groups according to stroke volume index and mean pressure gradient across the AV [normal-flow-high-gradient (NF-HG), low-flow-high-gradient, normal-flow-low-gradient, low-flow-low-gradient (LF-LG)]. In 89 patients who underwent cardiac computed tomography (CT), influential structural parameters of the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT), AV and ascending aorta were assessed. Bicuspid AS was more likely to present a NF-HG pattern (83.5% vs. 64.2%, P<0.001), and significantly fewer presented a LF-LG pattern compared with tricuspid AS. In bicuspid AS, there was a significant mismatch between geometric orifice area (GOA) on CT planimetry and effective orifice area (EOA) calculated using the echocardiographic continuity equation. Bicuspid AS presented with a larger angle between the LVOT-AV and aorta. Multivariate analysis of bicuspid AS revealed that systemic arterial compliance (β=-0.350, P=0.031) and the LVOT-AV-aorta angle (β=-0.538, P=0.001), and stroke volume index (β=0.409, P=0.008) were associated with a discrepancy between GOA and EOA. CONCLUSIONS: Flow-gradient patterns in bicuspid AS differ from those of tricuspid AS and are associated with the structural and functional characteristics of the aorta.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2019) conducted a cross-sectional in Severe aortic stenosis (n=252). Bicuspid aortic stenosis vs. Tricuspid aortic stenosis was evaluated on Normal-flow-high-gradient (NF-HG) pattern prevalence (p=<0.001). Severe bicuspid aortic stenosis presented with a significantly higher prevalence of a normal-flow-high-gradient pattern compared with severe tricuspid aortic stenosis (83.5% vs. 64.2%, P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: