Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate whether bicuspid anatomy affects the discrepancy between CT-derived annular size and intraoperative surgical size.
Does bicuspid anatomy affect the discrepancy between CT-derived annular size and intraoperative size in patients undergoing surgical AVR?
Does bicuspid anatomy affect the discrepancy between CT-derived annular size and intraoperative size in patients undergoing surgical AVR?
CT-derived aortic annulus measurements correlate well with surgical valve size in both bicuspid and tricuspid valves, with discrepancies driven by operator and prosthesis type rather than valve anatomy.
CT annular sizing correlates with surgical valve size independent of bicuspid anatomy; supports uniform approaches but leaves optimal protocols open.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether bicuspid anatomy affects the discrepancy between CT-derived annular size and intraoperative size. We retrospectively analyzed annular measurements in 667 patients who underwent surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR). Preoperative CT measurements of the aortic annulus were compared to surgically implanted valve sizes. To evaluate whether the bicuspid valve affects the differences between CT annulus diameter and surgical AVR size, patients with diameter larger by > 10% (CT-Lg group) on CT, compared to surgical AVR size, were compared with those having size difference < 10% (CT-Sim group). Propensity score matching yielded 183 matched patients from each group. Bicuspid aortic valve annulus parameters significantly correlated with surgical aortic valve size (r = 0.52-0.71; for all, p < 0.01). The most representative measurements corresponded to surgical aortic valve size were area-derived diameters in tricuspid aortic valve (r = 0.69, p < 0.001) and bicuspid without raphe (r = 0.71, p < 0.001), and perimeter-derived diameter in bicuspid with raphe (r = 0.63, p < 0.001). After propensity score matching, native valve type was not different between CT-Sim and CT-Lg groups. In multivariable analysis, the difference between CT-derived diameter and surgical AVR size was affected by the operator factor and types of prosthesis. Bicuspid aortic annulus diameters measured on CT showed a significant correlation with surgical aortic valve size. The difference between CT-derived diameter and surgical AVR size is affected by operator factor and the types of prosthesis but not affected by the bicuspid valve.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Choe et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: