ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2021
Hemodynamic Profiles Before and After Surgery in Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease-A Systematic Review of the Literature.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence and predictors of continued ascending aortic dilatation after TAVI in patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2025Article
- Aortopathy associated with bicuspid aortic valve: advances in clinical and hemodynamics research.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Review
- Restoration of flow in the aorta: a novel therapeutic target in aortic valve intervention.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2024Review
- Thoracic aortic aneurysm in an adolescent with intraoperative discovery of contained rupture: a case report.AME case reports · 2024Article
- Distal aortic biomechanics after transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement: a hypothesis generating study.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2023Article
- 4D Flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance consensus statement: 2023 update.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023Review
- Implications of Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease and Aortic Stenosis/Insufficiency as Risk Factors for Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease presents a unique management challenge both pre- and post-operatively. 4D flow MRI offers multiple tools for the assessment of the thoracic aorta in aortic valve disease. In particular, its assessment of flow patterns and wall shear stress have led to new understandings around the mechanisms of aneurysm development in BAV disease. Novel parameters have now been developed that have the potential to predict pathological aortic dilatation and may help to risk stratify BAV patients in future. This systematic review analyses the current 4D flow MRI literature after aortic valve and/or ascending aortic replacement in bicuspid aortic valve disease. 4D flow MRI has also identified distinct challenges posed by this cohort at the time of valve replacement compared to standard management of tri-leaflet disorders, and may help tailor the type and timing of replacement. Eccentric pathological flow patterns seen after bioprosthetic valve implantation, but not with mechanical prostheses, might be an important future consideration in intervention planning. 4D flow MRI also has promising potential in supporting the development of artificial valve prostheses and aortic conduits with more physiological flow patterns.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.