Mylène Shen1, Lionel Tastet1, Romain Capoulade2, Marie Arsenault1, Élisabeth Bédard1, Marie-Annick Clavel1, Philippe Pibarot1. 1. Department of Medicine, Institut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec-Université Laval/Quebec Heart & Lung Institute-Laval University, 2725 Chemin Sainte-Foy, Quebec City, Quebec G1V 4G5, Canada. 2. Inserm UMR 1087/CNRS UMR 6291, IRS-UN, L'institut du thorax, CHU Nantes, UNIV Nantes, 8 quai Moncousu, BP 70721, 44007 Nantes Cedex 1, France.
Abstract
AIMS: To compare the progression of aortic stenosis (AS) in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) or tricuspid aortic valve (TAV). METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and forty-one patients with mild-to-moderate AS, recruited prospectively in the PROGRESSA study, were included in this sub-analysis. Baseline clinical, Doppler echocardiography and multidetector computed tomography characteristics were compared between BAV (n = 32) and TAV (n = 109) patients. The 2-year haemodynamic [i.e. peak aortic jet velocity (Vpeak) and mean transvalvular gradient (MG)] and anatomic [i.e. aortic valve calcification density (AVCd) and aortic valve calcification density ratio (AVCd ratio)] progression of AS were compared between the two valve phenotypes. The 2-year progression rate of Vpeak was: 16 (-0 to 40) vs. 17 (3-35) cm/s, P = 0.95; of MG was: 1.8 (-0.7 to 5.8) vs. 2.6 (0.4-4.8) mmHg, P = 0.56; of AVCd was 32 (2-109) vs. 52 (25-85) AU/cm2, P = 0.15; and of AVCd ratio was: 0.08 (0.01-0.23) vs. 0.12 (0.06-0.18), P = 0.16 in patients with BAV vs. TAV. In univariable analyses, BAV was not associated with AS progression (all, P ≥ 0.26). However, with further adjustment for age, AS baseline severity, and several risk factors (i.e. sex, history of hypertension, creatinine level, diabetes, metabolic syndrome), BAV was independently associated with faster haemodynamic (Vpeak: β = 0.31, P = 0.02) and anatomic (AVCd: β = 0.26, P = 0.03 and AVCd ratio: β = 0.26, P = 0.03) progression of AS. CONCLUSION: In patients with mild-to-moderate AS, patients with BAV have faster haemodynamic and anatomic progression of AS when compared to TAV patients with similar age and risk profile. This study highlights the importance and necessity to closely monitor patients with BAV and to adequately control and treat their risk factors. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov Unique identifier: NCT01679431. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: To compare the progression of aortic stenosis (AS) in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) or tricuspid aortic valve (TAV). METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and forty-one patients with mild-to-moderate AS, recruited prospectively in the PROGRESSA study, were included in this sub-analysis. Baseline clinical, Doppler echocardiography and multidetector computed tomography characteristics were compared between BAV (n = 32) and TAV (n = 109) patients. The 2-year haemodynamic [i.e. peak aortic jet velocity (Vpeak) and mean transvalvular gradient (MG)] and anatomic [i.e. aortic valve calcification density (AVCd) and aortic valve calcification density ratio (AVCd ratio)] progression of AS were compared between the two valve phenotypes. The 2-year progression rate of Vpeak was: 16 (-0 to 40) vs. 17 (3-35) cm/s, P = 0.95; of MG was: 1.8 (-0.7 to 5.8) vs. 2.6 (0.4-4.8) mmHg, P = 0.56; of AVCd was 32 (2-109) vs. 52 (25-85) AU/cm2, P = 0.15; and of AVCd ratio was: 0.08 (0.01-0.23) vs. 0.12 (0.06-0.18), P = 0.16 in patients with BAV vs. TAV. In univariable analyses, BAV was not associated with AS progression (all, P ≥ 0.26). However, with further adjustment for age, AS baseline severity, and several risk factors (i.e. sex, history of hypertension, creatinine level, diabetes, metabolic syndrome), BAV was independently associated with faster haemodynamic (Vpeak: β = 0.31, P = 0.02) and anatomic (AVCd: β = 0.26, P = 0.03 and AVCd ratio: β = 0.26, P = 0.03) progression of AS. CONCLUSION: In patients with mild-to-moderate AS, patients with BAV have faster haemodynamic and anatomic progression of AS when compared to TAV patients with similar age and risk profile. This study highlights the importance and necessity to closely monitor patients with BAV and to adequately control and treat their risk factors. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov Unique identifier: NCT01679431. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: C M Otto; I G Burwash; M E Legget; B I Munt; M Fujioka; N L Healy; C D Kraft; C Y Miyake-Hull; R G Schwaegler Journal: Circulation Date: 1997-05-06 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Amr E Abbas; Laura M Franey; Steven Lester; Gilbert Raff; Michael J Gallagher; George Hanzel; Robert D Safian; Philippe Pibarot Journal: Echocardiography Date: 2014-08-20 Impact factor: 1.724
Authors: David Messika-Zeitoun; Lawrence F Bielak; Patricia A Peyser; Patrick F Sheedy; Stephen T Turner; Vuyisile T Nkomo; Jerome F Breen; Joseph Maalouf; Christopher Scott; A Jamil Tajik; Maurice Enriquez-Sarano Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 2006-12-21 Impact factor: 8.311
Authors: Marie-Annick Clavel; David Messika-Zeitoun; Philippe Pibarot; Shivani R Aggarwal; Joseph Malouf; Phillip A Araoz; Hector I Michelena; Caroline Cueff; Eric Larose; Romain Capoulade; Alec Vahanian; Maurice Enriquez-Sarano Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-09-24 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Vidu Garg; Alecia N Muth; Joshua F Ransom; Marie K Schluterman; Robert Barnes; Isabelle N King; Paul D Grossfeld; Deepak Srivastava Journal: Nature Date: 2005-07-17 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Brian R Lindman; Devraj Sukul; Marc R Dweck; Mahesh V Madhavan; Benoit J Arsenault; Megan Coylewright; W David Merryman; David E Newby; John Lewis; Frank E Harrell; Michael J Mack; Martin B Leon; Catherine M Otto; Philippe Pibarot Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2021-12-07 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Axel C P Diederichsen; Jes S Lindholt; Sören Möller; Kristian A Øvrehus; Søren Auscher; Jess Lambrechtsen; Susanne E Hosbond; Dilek H Alan; Grazina Urbonaviciene; Søren W Becker; Maise H Fredgart; Selma Hasific; Lars Folkestad; Oke Gerke; Lars Melholt Rasmussen; Jacob E Møller; Hans Mickley; Jordi S Dahl Journal: Circulation Date: 2022-04-25 Impact factor: 39.918