Is aortopathy in bicuspid aortic valve disease a congenital defect or a result of abnormal hemodynamics? A critical reappraisal of a one-sided argument.

Although there is adequate evidence that bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is an inheritable disorder, there is a great controversy regarding the pathogenesis of dilatation of the proximal aorta. The hemodynamic theory was the first explanation for BAV aortopathy. The genetic theory, however, has become increasingly popular over the last decade and can now be viewed as the clearly dominant one. The widespread belief that BAV disease is a congenital disorder of vascular connective tissue has led to more aggressive treatment recommendations of the proximal aorta in such patients, approaching aortic management recommendations for patients with Marfan syndrome. There is emerging evidence that the 'clinically normal' BAV is associated with abnormal flow patterns and asymmetrically increased wall stress in the proximal aorta. Recent in vitro and in vivo studies on BAV function provide a unique hemodynamic insight into the different phenotypes of BAV disease and asymmetry of corresponding aortopathy even in the presence of a 'clinically normal' BAV. On the other hand, there is a subgroup of young male patients with BAV and a root dilatation phenotype, who may present the predominantly genetic form of BAV disease. In the face of these important findings, we feel that a critical review of this clinical problem is timely and appropriate, as the prevailing BAV-aortopathy theory undoubtedly affects the surgical approach to this common clinical entity. Thorough analysis of the recent literature shows a growing amount of evidence supporting the hemodynamic theory of aortopathy in patients with BAV disease. Data from recent studies requires a reevaluation of our overwhelming support of the genetic theory, and obliges us to acknowledge that hemodynamics plays an important role in the development of this disease process. Given the marked heterogeneity of BAV disease, further studies are required in order to more precisely determine which theory is the 'correct' one for explaining the obviously different types of BAV-associated aortopathy.