ArticleInterdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2024
Systematic adjustment of root dimensions to cusp size in aortic valve repair: a computer simulation.
Article in Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2024. 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.
- Article
- Article
- Quadricuspid aortic valve repair: Results of a phenotype-based approach.JTCVS techniques · 2025Article
- Use of complementary electrocardiogram-gated cardiac computed tomography in the assessment of aortic valve repairability: a pilot study†.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Comparison of pulmonary and aortic root and cusp dimensions in normal adults using computed tomography: potential implications for Ross procedure planning.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAortic valve repair requires the creation of a normal geometry of cusps and aortic root. Of the different dimensions, geometric cusp height is the most difficult to change while annular and sinotubular dimensions can be easily modified. The objective of this study was to investigate, by computer simulation, ideal combinations of annular and sinotubular junction size for a given geometric height.
methodsBased on a literature review of anatomical data, a computational biomechanics model was generated for a tricuspid aortic valve. We aimed to determine the ideal relationships for the root dimensions, keeping geometric height constant and creating different combinations of the annular and sinotubular junction dimensions. Using this model, 125 virtual anatomies were created, with 25 different combinations of annulus and sinotubular junction. Effective height, coaptation height and mechanical cusp stress were calculated with the valves in closed configuration.
resultsGenerally, within the analysed range of geometric heights, changes to the annular diameter yielded a stronger impact than sinotubular junction diameter changes for optimal valve configuration. The best results were obtained with the sinotubular junction being 2-4 mm larger than the annulus, leading to higher effective height, normal coaptation height and lower stress. Within the range tested, stenosis did not occur due to annular reduction.
conclusionsIn tricuspid aortic valves, the geometric height can be used to predict ideal post-repair annular and sinotubular junction dimensions for optimal valve configuration. Such an ideal configuration is associated with reduced cusp stress.
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.