ReviewAnnals of cardiothoracic surgery2022
Speaking a common language: the international consensus on bicuspid aortic valve nomenclature and classification.
Review in Annals of cardiothoracic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lifetime Outcomes Following Intervention for Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis in Childhood.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- The Role of Global Longitudinal Strain in Detecting Early Left Ventricular Dysfunction in Pediatric Bicuspid Aortic Valve Patients.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Bicuspid Aortic Valve and Sudden Cardiac Death.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Bicuspid Aortic Valve in Children and Young Adults for Cardiologists and Cardiac Surgeons: State-of-the-Art of Literature Review.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Review
- Echocardiography of the aortic root: a practical approach for aortic valve-sparing surgery.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The congenital bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) condition is a valvulo-aortopathy with heterogeneous phenotypic expressions and clinical outcomes. A multitude of pre-existing classification systems, some extensive and some succinct, utilize combinations of numbers and/or letters to describe the condition. These diverse nomenclature systems are used according to the random preference of clinicians and researchers, generating confusion in clinical practice and research alike, effectively creating a barrier of communication at multiple levels. Based on imaging, pathology, surgery and clinical history evidence-based principles, and in utilizing the English language, the international nomenclature and classification consensus on the congenital BAV and its aortopathy offers a simple nosologic and phenotypic format that covers all possible phenotypes and clinical presentations of the bicuspid valvulo-aortopathy. From the nosology perspective, the valvulo-aortopathy has three major clinical presentations: (I) typical valvulo-aortopathy; (II) complex valvulo-aortopathy; and (III) undiagnosed or uncomplicated valvulo-aortopathy. From the valvular perspective, the congenital BAV has three major phenotypic expressions: (I) the fused BAV; (II) the 2-sinus BAV; and (III) the partial fusion (forme fruste) BAV. From the aortopathy perspective, the condition has three major phenotypic expressions: (I) ascending phenotype; (II) root phenotype; and (III) extended phenotypes. The international consensus is intended for universal use by Clinicians (pediatric and adult), echocardiography sonographers and physicians, cardiovascular advanced-imaging specialists, interventional cardiologists, cardiovascular surgeons, pathologists, geneticists and researchers encompassing clinical and basic research areas. When new landmark research is available, this international consensus may be subject to change in accordance with evidence-based data.
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.