Knowledge of native valve anatomy is essential in follow-up of patients after aortic valve replacement

Bicuspid aortic valve: evolving knowledge and new questions

Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), a common congenital anomaly with various morphological phenotypes, is also characterised by marked heterogeneity in clinical presentations including clinically silent condition with mild valvulo-aortopathy, progressive valvulopathy and complex valvulo-aortopathy with shorter life expectancy. The clinical importance of using a general and unified nosology for BAV is well-accepted by opinion leaders and an international consensus statement has been recently published, which will serve as an important scientific platform for BAV. This review describes the current knowledge of BAV based on clinical studies, addresses several unresolved issues requiring investigators' attention and highlights the necessity of prospective studies with a very long follow-up duration for better appreciation of BAV-associated valvulo-aortopathy. In addition, the progression of valvular calcification in patients with BAV and its potential contribution to development of valvulopathy will be discussed.

Family screening in patients with isolated bicuspid aortic valve : Restriction to those with aortic dilatation is not justified

Aim

To determine the prevalence of undiagnosed bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and isolated aortic dilatation in first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with isolated BAV and to explore the recurrence risk of BAV in different subgroups of probands with BAV. Recent American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines recommend family screening in patients with associated aortopathy only.

Methods

During follow-up visits, patients with isolated BAV received a printed invitation for their FDRs advising cardiac screening.

Results

From 2012–2019, 257 FDRs of 118 adult BAV patients were screened, among whom 63 (53%) index patients had undergone aortic valve surgery (AVS), including concomitant aortic replacement in 25 (21%). Of the non-operated index patients, 31 (26%) had aortic dilatation (> 40 mm). Mean age of the FDRs was 48 years (range 4–83) and 42% were male. The FDR group comprised 20 parents, 103 siblings and 134 offspring. Among these FDRs, 12 (4.7%) had a previously undiagnosed BAV and 23 (8.9%) had an isolated aortic dilatation. FDRs of the probands with previous AVS (n = 147) had a risk ratio for BAV of 2.25 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62–8.10). FDRs of the probands with BAV and repaired or unrepaired aortic dilatation (n = 127) had a risk ratio for BAV of 0.51 (95% CI 0.16–1.66).

Conclusion

Screening FDRs of patients with isolated BAV resulted in a reasonable yield of 14% new cases of BAV or isolated aortic dilatation. A trend towards an increased risk of BAV in FDRs was observed in the probands with previous AVS, whereas this risk seemed to be diminished in the probands with associated aortic dilatation. This latter finding does not support the restrictive ACC/AHA recommendation.

Differences at surgery between patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valves

Aim

To determine differences in surgical procedures and clinical characteristics at the time of surgery between native bicuspid aortic valves (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valves (TAV) in patients being followed up after aortic valve surgery (AVS).

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study in a non-academic hospital, we identified patients who had a surgeon’s report of the number of native valve cusps and were still being followed up. We selected patients with BAV and TAV, and used multivariable regression analyses to identify associations between BAV-TAV and pre-specified clinical characteristics.

Results

Of 439 patients, 140 had BAV (32%) and 299 TAV (68%). BAV patients were younger at the time of surgery (mean age 58.6 ± 13 years) than TAV patients (69.1 ± 12 years, p < 0.001) and were more often male (64% vs 53%; p = 0.029). Cardiovascular risk factors were less prevalent in BAV than in TAV patients at the time of surgery (hypertension (31% vs 55%), hypercholesterolaemia (29% vs 58%) and diabetes (7% vs 16%); all p < 0.005). Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was performed less often in BAV than in TAV patients (14% vs 39%, p < 0.001), even when adjusted for confounders (adjusted odds ratio (adj.OR) 0.45; 95% CI: 0.25–0.83). In contrast, surgery of the proximal aorta was performed more often (31% vs 11%, respectively, p < 0.001; adj.OR 2.3; 95% CI: 1.3–4.0).

Conclusions

Whereas mechanical stress is the supposed major driver of valvulopathy towards AVS in BAV, prevalent cardiovascular risk factors are a suspected driver towards the requirement for AVS and concomitant CABG in TAV, an observation based on surgical determination of the number of valve cusps.