Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

Valve cuspidity: a risk factor for aortic valve repair

T. Holubec, P. Zacek, M. Jamaliramin, MY. Emmert, M. Tuna, P. Nedbal, J. Dominik, J. Harrer, V. Falk, J. Vojacek,

. 2014 ; 29 (5) : 585-92.

Language English Country United States

Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze short- and mid-term results after aortic valve (AV) repair with particular regard to the impact of valve cuspidity (bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valve). METHODS: One hundred patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) undergoing aortic valve repair between November 2007 and October 2012 were included in the study. Sixty patients had bicuspid AV (BAV group; 11 females) and 40 patients had tricuspid AV (TAV group; 13 females). AR > grade 2 was present in 47 (78%) patients in the BAV and in 35 (88%) patients in the TAV group. Follow-up was complete in 100% and median was 25 months. RESULTS: Isolated aortic valve repair was performed in 27 (45%) of BAV patients and in six (15%) of TAV patients. Replacement of the ascending aorta and/or aortic root was performed in 33 (55%) of BAV patients and in 34 (86%) of TAV patients. There was no death within 30 days postoperatively, while two patients died (TAV group) during the follow-up period. There was no statistical difference between BAV and TAV groups with regard to the survival (100 ± 0% vs. 95 ± 4%, p = 0.102), the three-year freedom from AV-related reoperation (90 ± 5% vs. 89 ± 6%, p = 0.456), and the three-year freedom from AR grade > 2 (86 ± 6% vs. 82 ± 7%, p = 0.866), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates no difference in mid-term results after regurgitant bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valve repair, suggesting that bicuspid valve may not be a risk factor for aortic valve repair.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc15023338
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20150724110013.0
007      
ta
008      
150709s2014 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1111/jocs.12382 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)24919866
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Holubec, Tomas $u Department of Cardiac Surgery, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic; Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
245    10
$a Valve cuspidity: a risk factor for aortic valve repair / $c T. Holubec, P. Zacek, M. Jamaliramin, MY. Emmert, M. Tuna, P. Nedbal, J. Dominik, J. Harrer, V. Falk, J. Vojacek,
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze short- and mid-term results after aortic valve (AV) repair with particular regard to the impact of valve cuspidity (bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valve). METHODS: One hundred patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) undergoing aortic valve repair between November 2007 and October 2012 were included in the study. Sixty patients had bicuspid AV (BAV group; 11 females) and 40 patients had tricuspid AV (TAV group; 13 females). AR > grade 2 was present in 47 (78%) patients in the BAV and in 35 (88%) patients in the TAV group. Follow-up was complete in 100% and median was 25 months. RESULTS: Isolated aortic valve repair was performed in 27 (45%) of BAV patients and in six (15%) of TAV patients. Replacement of the ascending aorta and/or aortic root was performed in 33 (55%) of BAV patients and in 34 (86%) of TAV patients. There was no death within 30 days postoperatively, while two patients died (TAV group) during the follow-up period. There was no statistical difference between BAV and TAV groups with regard to the survival (100 ± 0% vs. 95 ± 4%, p = 0.102), the three-year freedom from AV-related reoperation (90 ± 5% vs. 89 ± 6%, p = 0.456), and the three-year freedom from AR grade > 2 (86 ± 6% vs. 82 ± 7%, p = 0.866), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates no difference in mid-term results after regurgitant bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valve repair, suggesting that bicuspid valve may not be a risk factor for aortic valve repair.
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
650    _2
$a věkové faktory $7 D000367
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    _2
$a aortální chlopeň $x abnormality $7 D001021
650    _2
$a aortální insuficience $x chirurgie $7 D001022
650    _2
$a kardiovaskulární chirurgické výkony $7 D013504
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a následné studie $7 D005500
650    _2
$a nemoci srdečních chlopní $7 D006349
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a recidiva $7 D012008
650    _2
$a reoperace $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D012086
650    _2
$a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
650    _2
$a rizikové faktory $7 D012307
650    _2
$a časové faktory $7 D013997
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
650    _2
$a trikuspidální chlopeň $7 D014261
650    _2
$a mladý dospělý $7 D055815
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Zacek, Pavel
700    1_
$a Jamaliramin, Mostafa
700    1_
$a Emmert, Maxmilian Y
700    1_
$a Tuna, Martin
700    1_
$a Nedbal, Pavel
700    1_
$a Dominik, Jan
700    1_
$a Harrer, Jan
700    1_
$a Falk, Volkmar
700    1_
$a Vojacek, Jan
773    0_
$w MED00002566 $t Journal of cardiac surgery $x 1540-8191 $g Roč. 29, č. 5 (2014), s. 585-92
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24919866 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20150709 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20150724110053 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1083676 $s 906331
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2014 $b 29 $c 5 $d 585-92 $i 1540-8191 $m Journal of cardiac surgery $n J Card Surg $x MED00002566
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20150709

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...