ArticleJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2024
Bicuspid Valve Aortopathy: Is It Reasonable to Define a Different Surgical Cutoff Based on Different Aortic Wall Mechanical Properties Compared to Those of the Tricuspid Valve?
Article in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease-Associated Aortopathy in Pediatric Subjects-From Traditional Assessment to Current Advances and Future Perspectives: A Narrative Review.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Intra-Patient Heterogeneity of Mechanical and Anatomical Properties in Thoracic Aortic Wall: An Ex Vivo Study Comparing Patients with Bicuspid and Tricuspid Aortic Valve Aortopathy.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
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
Abstract
backgroundIn this study, we examined and compared ex vivo mechanical properties of aortic walls in patients with bicuspid (BAV) and tricuspid (TAV) aortic valve aortopathy to investigate if the anatomical peculiarities in the BAV group are related to an increased frailty of the aortic wall and, therefore, if a different surgical cutoff point for ascending aortic replacement could be reasonable in such patients.
methodsUltimate stress tests were performed on fresh aortic wall specimens harvested during elective aortic surgery in BAV (n. 33) and TAV (n. 77) patients. Three mechanical parameters were evaluated at the failure point, under both longitudinal and circumferential forces: the peak strain (Pstr), peak stress (PS), and maximum elastic modulus (EM). The relationships between the three mechanical parameters and preoperative characteristics were evaluated, with a special focus on evaluating potential risk factors for severely impaired mechanical properties, cumulatively and comparatively (BAV vs. TAV groups).
resultsThe patient populations were inhomogeneous, as BAV patients reached surgical indication, according to the maximum aortic dilatation, at a younger age (58 ± 15 vs. 64 ± 13;
conclusionsBAV aortopathy is not correlated with impaired mechanical properties of the aortic wall as such. Different surgical cutoff points for BAV aortopathy, therefore, seem to be unjustified. An age of >66 and a maximum aortic dilatation of >52 mm, however, seem to significantly influence the mechanical properties of the aortic wall in both groups. These findings, therefore, could suggest the need for more accurate monitoring and evaluation in such conditions.
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.