Literature DB >> 30834578

Misclassification of bicuspid aortic valves is common and varies by imaging modality and patient characteristics.

Peyton M Cramer1, Siddharth K Prakash1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most prevalent adult congenital heart defect. BAV causes lifelong progressive disease that can be prevented by early diagnosis and long-term surveillance, but may be compromised by misclassification of valve morphology.
METHODS: The study population was derived from the UTHealth Bicuspid Aortic Valve Registry, which includes serial images on more than 200 participants over a mean follow-up interval of 2.8 years. We abstracted descriptions of aortic valve morphology from transthoracic or transesophageal echocardiography, computed tomography angiography, and magnetic resonance angiography reports. We used chi-square and t tests to determine associations between reported valve morphologies (definitely bicuspid, possibly bicuspid, tricuspid, or uncertain) and clinical characteristics and assessed image quality using a validated tool.
RESULTS: About 40% of participants were misclassified in at least one imaging report. The mean interval between misclassification and correct diagnosis was 22 months. TEE, MR and CT were more sensitive than TTE and successfully reclassified 20% of participants, but were only used in 14% of patients. Misclassification was associated with age, the extent of valve calcification and image quality, but was not significantly associated with aortic regurgitation, gender, or cusp configuration.
CONCLUSION: Misclassification of BAV is prevalent, frequently leads to delayed diagnosis, and is more likely to occur in the most severely affected cases. TEE, CT and MR may increase diagnostic accuracy in up to half of BAV cases but are underutilized. Additional studies are needed to determine if misclassification of BAV patients leads to increased long-term morbidity and mortality.
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  adult; bicuspid aortic valve; congenital heart defect; delayed diagnosis

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30834578      PMCID: PMC6532050          DOI: 10.1111/echo.14295

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Echocardiography        ISSN: 0742-2822            Impact factor:   1.724


  13 in total

1.  American Society of Echocardiography recommendations for quality echocardiography laboratory operations.

Authors:  Michael H Picard; David Adams; S Michelle Bierig; John M Dent; Pamela S Douglas; Linda D Gillam; Andrew M Keller; David J Malenka; Frederick A Masoudi; Marti McCulloch; Patricia A Pellikka; Priscilla J Peters; Raymond F Stainback; G Monet Strachan; William A Zoghbi
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 5.251

Review 2.  Surgical thresholds for bicuspid aortic valve associated aortopathy.

Authors:  Ashutosh A Hardikar; Thomas H Marwick
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2013-12

Review 3.  2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  Rick A Nishimura; Catherine M Otto; Robert O Bonow; Blase A Carabello; John P Erwin; Robert A Guyton; Patrick T O'Gara; Carlos E Ruiz; Nikolaos J Skubas; Paul Sorajja; Thoralf M Sundt; James D Thomas; Jeffrey L Anderson; Jonathan L Halperin; Nancy M Albert; Biykem Bozkurt; Ralph G Brindis; Mark A Creager; Lesley H Curtis; David DeMets; Robert A Guyton; Judith S Hochman; Richard J Kovacs; E Magnus Ohman; Susan J Pressler; Frank W Sellke; Win-Kuang Shen; William G Stevenson; Clyde W Yancy
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 5.209

4.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for bicuspid aortic valve syndrome: the time is now.

Authors:  Chetan Shenoy; Martin S Maron; Natesa G Pandian
Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 6.875

5.  Incidental aortic valve calcification on CT scans: significance for bicuspid and tricuspid valve disease.

Authors:  Michael D Hope; Thomas H Urbania; John-Paul J Yu; Sam Chitsaz; Elaine Tseng
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2011-11-21       Impact factor: 3.173

6.  Incidence of aortic complications in patients with bicuspid aortic valves.

Authors:  Hector I Michelena; Amber D Khanna; Douglas Mahoney; Edit Margaryan; Yan Topilsky; Rakesh M Suri; Ben Eidem; William D Edwards; Thoralf M Sundt; Maurice Enriquez-Sarano
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-09-14       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Cardiac CT for the differentiation of bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valves: comparison with echocardiography and surgery.

Authors:  Hatem Alkadhi; Sebastian Leschka; Pedro T Trindade; Gudrun Feuchtner; Paul Stolzmann; André Plass; Stephan Baumueller
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Frequency of bicuspid aortic valve in young male conscripts by echocardiogram.

Authors:  Stefano Nistri; Cristina Basso; Chiara Marzari; Paolo Mormino; Gaetano Thiene
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2005-09-01       Impact factor: 2.778

9.  Reliability of transthoracic echocardiography in the assessment of aortic valve morphology: pathological correlation in 178 patients.

Authors:  K L Chan; W A Stinson; J P Veinot
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 5.223

Review 10.  Bicuspid aortic valve: unresolved issues and role of imaging specialists.

Authors:  Jae-Kwan Song
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2015-03-30
View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with bicuspid valve morphology: a roadmap towards standardization.

Authors:  Tian-Yuan Xiong; Walid Ben Ali; Yuan Feng; Kentaro Hayashida; Hasan Jilaihawi; Azeem Latib; Michael Kang-Yin Lee; Martin B Leon; Raj R Makkar; Thomas Modine; Christoph Naber; Yong Peng; Nicolo Piazza; Michael J Reardon; Simon Redwood; Ashok Seth; Lars Sondergaard; Edgar Tay; Didier Tchetche; Wei-Hsian Yin; Mao Chen; Bernard Prendergast; Darren Mylotte
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2022-06-20       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 2.  Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis: From Pathophysiological Mechanism, Imaging Diagnosis, to Clinical Treatment Methods.

Authors:  Nils Perrin; Réda Ibrahim; Nicolas Dürrleman; Arsène Basmadjian; Lionel Leroux; Philippe Demers; Thomas Modine; Walid Ben Ali
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-02-08
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.