What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Case-Control. Population: Nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valve (n=40). Intervention: Nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valve vs. Matched controls. Primary outcome: Pulse wave velocity in the aortic arch (p=0.01).

What does this research mean for the field?

Patients with nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valves exhibit reduced aortic elasticity and aortic root dilatation, which are associated with increased aortic regurgitation and left ventricular hypertrophy. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.NOVEL_FINDING. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

To evaluate aortic wall elasticity and dimensions using magnetic resonance imaging and determine their relationship to valve competence and left ventricular function in patients with nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valves.

September 19, 2026Journal of the American College of CardiologyOpen Access

Reduced Aortic Elasticity and Dilatation Are Associated With Aortic Regurgitation and Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Nonstenotic Bicuspid Aortic Valve Patients

Q: What are the key findings of this study?

Patients with nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valves had reduced aortic elasticity, indicated by increased pulse wave velocity in the aortic arch compared to controls (5.6 vs. 4.5 m/s, p=0.01).

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

Nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valves link to ~24% higher aortic arch pulse wave velocity versus controls.

P=0.01
n=40

Why the study?

The relationship between aortic wall elasticity, aortic dimensions, aortic valve competence, and LV function in patients with BAVs had not previously been studied with magnetic resonance imaging.

Population

20 patients with nonstenotic BAVs and 20 matched control patients

Comparison

Nonstenotic BAV patients vs matched control patients

Design

Matched case-control magnetic resonance imaging study

Authors

HGHeynric B. GrotenhuisPrincess Máxima Center JOJaap OttenkampAmsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam JWJos J.M. WestenbergCardiac Imaging

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Supports aortic monitoring in nonstenotic BAV; leaves open whether elasticity measures predict progression or guide intervention.

Key Points

To evaluate aortic wall elasticity and dimensions using magnetic resonance imaging and determine their relationship to valve competence and left ventricular function in patients with nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valves.
Conducted a magnetic resonance imaging study in 20 patients with nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valves (mean age 27 ± 11 years) and 20 matched control patients.
Measured pulse wave velocity across the aortic arch and descending aorta, aortic root distensibility, aortic dimensions across four levels, regurgitant fraction, and left ventricular mass.
Bicuspid aortic valve patients exhibited reduced aortic elasticity, shown by increased pulse wave velocity in the arch (5.6 ± 1.3 vs. 4.5 ± 1.1 m/s, p = 0.01) and descending aorta (5.2 ± 1.8 vs. 4.3 ± 0.9 m/s, p = 0.03), alongside lower root distensibility (3.1 ± 1.2 × 10⁻³ vs. 5.6 ± 3.2 × 10⁻³ mm Hg⁻¹, p < 0.01).
Aortic root dimensions were enlarged across all four predefined levels (mean difference 3.6 to 4.2 mm, p ≤ 0.04) and left ventricular mass was elevated (54 ± 12 vs. 46 ± 12 g/m², p = 0.04) despite preserved ejection fraction (55 ± 8% vs. 56 ± 6%, p = 0.61).
Aortic regurgitation fraction correlated with annular dilatation (r = 0.45, p = 0.044) and reduced distensibility (r = 0.37, p = 0.041), while arch pulse wave velocity correlated with increased left ventricular mass (r = 0.42, p = 0.041).

Study Design

Type

Case-Control (n=40)

PICO

Population

40 individuals, comprising 20 patients with nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valves (mean age 27 years) and 20 matched controls, assessed via magnetic resonance imaging.

Exposure / Comparator

Nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valve vs Matched controls

Primary Outcome

Pulse wave velocity in the aortic arch, p=0.01

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 5.6% vs 4.5%

p-value: p=0.01

Cite This Study

Grotenhuis et al. (2007) conducted a case-control in Nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valve (n=40). Nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valve vs. Matched controls was evaluated on Pulse wave velocity in the aortic arch (p=0.01). Patients with nonstenotic bicuspid aortic valves had reduced aortic elasticity, indicated by increased pulse wave velocity in the aortic arch compared to controls (5.6 vs. 4.5 m/s, p=0.01).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aae52d6234a2bad59d2fe65 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2006.12.044

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Reduced Aortic Elasticity and Dilatation Are Associated With Aortic Regurgitation and Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Nonstenotic Bicuspid Aortic Valve Patients

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Study Design

PICO

Main Result

Cite This Study

Reduced Aortic Elasticity and Dilatation Are Associated With Aortic Regurgitation and Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Nonstenotic Bicuspid Aortic Valve Patients

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Study Design

PICO

Main Result

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider