Literature DB >> 29468829

Disease progression and variation in clinical practice for isolated bicuspid aortic valve in children.

Melissa S W Yamauchi1,2, Michael D Puchalski1,2, Hsin Ti Weng1, Nelangi M Pinto1,2, Susan P Etheridge1,2, Angela P Presson1, Lloyd Y Tani1,2, L LuAnn Minich1,2, Richard V Williams1,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Disease progression of an isolated bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) in children is poorly understood and adult management guidelines may not be applicable. Thus, we sought to evaluate disease progression of pediatric isolated BAV and its relationship to current management practices.
METHODS: Children with a BAV and ≤mild aortic stenosis (AS) and/or aortic regurgitation (AR) at the time of initial evaluation were included in this retrospective cohort study (1/2005-12/2014). Outcomes included change in z-scores for aortic root and ascending aorta diameters, cardiac interventions, adverse outcomes, recommended follow-up interval, and frequency of cardiac imaging studies at each follow up evaluation, as well as AS/AR severity at final evaluation. Outcomes were analyzed using generalized mixed-effect models with subject and provider clustering.
RESULTS: BAV disease progression was evaluated in 294 subjects over 4.1 ± 2.4 (range 0.2-9.5) years. Ascending aorta z-scores increased by 0.1/year (P < .001) but aortic root diameter z-scores were unchanged. AS and/or AR progressed to >mild in 9 (3%), 1 subject underwent cardiac intervention, and none had a major complication. Management was evaluated in 454 subjects (1343 encounters) with 27 different cardiologists. The average recommended follow-up interval was 1.5 ± 0.9 years. Younger age at diagnosis, greater aortic root or ascending aorta z-score at diagnosis, ≥mild AS/AR at follow-up, and earlier diagnosis era were associated with shorter recommended follow-up interval (P < .001 for all). Imaging was obtained at 87% of follow-up encounters and was associated with age at encounter with children ≥12 years most frequently imaged (P < .001). Provider accounted for 14% of variability in recommended follow-up interval and 24% of imaging variability (P < .001 for both).
CONCLUSIONS: We found little to no evidence of disease progression in children with an isolated BAV. Given the low risk, close follow-up and frequent cardiac imaging for BAV surveillance may not be warranted for children.
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aortopathy; bicuspid aortic valve; pediatrics; practice variation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29468829     DOI: 10.1111/chd.12591

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Congenit Heart Dis        ISSN: 1747-079X            Impact factor:   2.007


  3 in total

1.  Comprehensive MR Analysis of Cardiac Function, Aortic Hemodynamics and Left Ventricular Strain in Pediatric Cohort with Isolated Bicuspid Aortic Valve.

Authors:  Heather A Stefek; Haben Berhane; Joshua D Robinson; Brian Reilly; Alexander Ruh; Michael Markl; Cynthia K Rigsby
Journal:  Pediatr Cardiol       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 1.655

2.  Applications of a Specialty Bicuspid Aortic Valve Program: Clinical Continuity and Translational Collaboration.

Authors:  Erin E Crawford; Patrick M McCarthy; S Chris Malaisrie; Jyothy J Puthumana; Joshua D Robinson; Michael Markl; Menghan Liu; Adin-Cristian Andrei; David G Guzzardi; Jane Kruse; Paul W M Fedak
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-05-05       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 3.  Bicuspid Aortic Valve in Children and Adolescents: A Comprehensive Review.

Authors:  Gaia Spaziani; Francesca Girolami; Luigi Arcieri; Giovanni Battista Calabri; Giulio Porcedda; Chiara Di Filippo; Francesca Chiara Surace; Marco Pozzi; Silvia Favilli
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-20
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.