Key result
Although bicuspid aortic stenosis patients had higher unadjusted 8-year survival than tricuspid patients (85% vs 71%, P<0.0001), ascending aorta dilatation rates became similar after TAVR.
Why the study?
Differences between bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valve patients regarding presentation, TAVR incidence, survival, and ascending aorta dilatation rates before and after TAVR needed assessment.
Does transcatheter aortic valve replacement alter the ascending aorta dilatation rate in patients with bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic stenosis?
Cohort (n=667)
Does transcatheter aortic valve replacement alter the ascending aorta dilatation rate in patients with bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic stenosis?
Absolute Event Rate: 85% vs 71%
p-value: p=< 0.0001
TAVR normalizes the accelerated ascending aorta dilatation rate seen in bicuspid aortic stenosis to match that of tricuspid aortic stenosis, suggesting a strong hemodynamic component to aortic dilatation in BAV.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
TAVR may normalize post-procedural dilatation rates in BAV-AS; supports hemodynamic contribution but leaves open long-term aortic outcomes.
Zheng et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in chronic moderate to severe or severe aortic stenosis (n=667). Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) vs. Tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) was evaluated on 8-year survival (p=< 0.0001). Although bicuspid aortic stenosis patients had higher unadjusted 8-year survival than tricuspid patients (85% vs 71%, P<0.0001), ascending aorta dilatation rates became similar after TAVR.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: