Key result
Bicuspid aortic valve is a highly heritable congenital heart disease with complex genetics, and while genes like NOTCH1 have been identified, the majority of its genetic basis remains obscure.
Why the study?
Despite the significant burden of BAV, data remain limited regarding its pathophysiology, risk factors, and genetics, with the majority of its complex genetic architecture still obscure.
This review highlights the complex genetic model of bicuspid aortic valve and discusses the clinical value of cascade screening for this highly heritable condition.
Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most common valvular congenital heart disease, with a prevalence of 0.5 to 2% in the general population. Patients with BAV are at risk for developing cardiovascular complications, some of which are life-threatening. BAV has a wide spectrum of clinical presentations, ranging from silent malformation to severe and even fatal cardiac events. Despite the significant burden on both the patients and the health systems, data are limited regarding pathophysiology, risk factors, and genetics. Family studies indicate that BAV is highly heritable, with autosomal dominant inheritance, incomplete penetrance, variable expressivity, and male predominance. Owing to its complex genetic model, including high genetic heterogenicity, only a few genes were identified in association with BAV, while the majority of BAV genetics remains obscure. Here, we review the different forms of BAV and the current data regarding its genetics. Given the clear heritably of BAV with the potential high impact on clinical outcome, the clinical value and cost effectiveness of cascade screening are discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tessler et al. (2021) conducted a review in Bicuspid Aortic Valve (BAV). Bicuspid aortic valve is a highly heritable congenital heart disease with complex genetics, and while genes like NOTCH1 have been identified, the majority of its genetic basis remains obscure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: