Key result
Aortic valve reimplantation eliminated preoperative differences in annular shape between tricuspid (Ellipticity Index 1.3) and type 0 bicuspid (1.1) valves, restoring expansibility in bicuspid valves.
Why the study?
The aortic annulus plays an important role in aortic valve dynamism, shape, and geometry, but differences in annular size and shape between native BAVs and TAVs after aortic valve reimplantation were not well evaluated.
Does aortic valve reimplantation modify the morphological shape and expansibility of the aortic annulus in patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valves?
Observational (n=35)
Does aortic valve reimplantation modify the morphological shape and expansibility of the aortic annulus in patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valves?
Aortic valve reimplantation standardizes the geometry of the aortic annulus across both bicuspid and tricuspid valves, restoring a degree of expansibility to previously inelastic bicuspid valves.
May support annular standardization via reimplantation in bicuspid valves; extends morphological data but leaves open need for prospective trials.
OBJECTIVES: Aortic valve-sparing operations have been shown to produce fewer valve-related complications than valve replacement. The aortic root is a morphological and functional unit in which the annulus plays an important role on dynamism, shape and geometry of the valve with different results in bicuspid aortic valves (BAVs) or tricuspid aortic valves (TAVs). The aim is to evaluate the differences in the size and shape of the aortic annulus between native BAVs and TAVs using ECG-gated computed tomography (CT) after a reimplantation procedure. METHODS: We selected 35 patients scheduled for aortic valve reimplantation who underwent good-quality preoperative and postoperative ECG-gated contrast-enhanced CT scan of the aortic root. Twenty-three patients had TAV, 8 patients type 1 BAV and 4 patients type 0 BAV. Major diameter and minor diameter, perimeter (P) and area (A) were measured. The shape of the aortic annulus was considered 'circular' or 'elliptic' according to the Ellipticity Index. We also selected a subgroup of 18 patients (9 TAVs and 9 BAVs) to evaluate annular shape and size variations through the cardiac cycle and to study the expansibility both in the preoperative and in the postoperative phases. RESULTS: Preoperative CT scans showed an elliptic shape of TAVs (Ellipticity Index 1.3 ± 0.1), a circular shape of type 0 BAVs (1.1 ± 0.1) and an intermediate behaviour of type 1 BAVs, suggesting a possible gradual spectrum of circularity from TAVs to type 1 BAVs to type 0 BAVs. Postoperative CT scans did not show any significant difference in annular shape among the 3 groups, which demonstated a similar roundness, obviating the preoperative differences. Analysing the expansibility of the aortic annulus during the cardiac cycle, we observed that it was completely absent in the preoperative phase in BAVs, while in the postoperative phase, both TAVs and BAVs showed a small but similar expansibility after the annular reduction. CONCLUSIONS: There is a possible gradual spectrum in terms of shape, from native TAVs, to type 1 BAVS to type 0 BAVs. These differences are eliminated in the postoperative phase, suggesting an active role of the annuloplasty on the geometry of the aortic annulus. The preoperative analysis showed a complete inelasticity of BAVs, which was partly restored in the postoperative phase.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chirichilli et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Aortic valve disease requiring reimplantation (n=35). Bicuspid aortic valve morphology vs. Tricuspid aortic valve morphology was evaluated on Differences in the size and shape of the aortic annulus (Ellipticity Index). Aortic valve reimplantation eliminated preoperative differences in annular shape between tricuspid (Ellipticity Index 1.3) and type 0 bicuspid (1.1) valves, restoring expansibility in bicuspid valves.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: