ArticleCardiovascular intervention and therapeutics2026
Cardiac damage stages and prognosis in patients with bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valve: insights from the CURRENT AS Registry-2.
Article in Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
38 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac damage staging is a validated predictor of outcomes in tricuspid aortic valve aortic stenosis (TAV-AS), but its role in bicuspid aortic valve aortic stenosis (BAV-AS) remains unclear. We compared baseline characteristics, cardiac damage stages, and clinical outcomes between BAV-AS and TAV-AS patients. We analyzed 3365 patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) from the CURRENT AS Registry-2, including 222 with BAV-AS and 3143 with TAV-AS. Cardiac damage stages were classified based on index echocardiographic findings. The primary outcome was a composite of death or heart failure hospitalization. BAV-AS patients were significantly younger and had fewer cardiovascular comorbidities than TAV-AS patients. Despite greater AS severity, BAV-AS patients more often presented with less advanced cardiac damage (stage 0–1: 53% versus 29%, P < 0.001). Among patients aged < 75 years, early-stage cardiac damage was more prevalent in BAV-AS, whereas TAV-AS patients aged < 75 years showed higher rates of advanced cardiac damage. The cumulative 3-year incidence of the primary outcome was significantly lower in BAV-AS than in TAV-AS (9.9% versus 38.4%, P < 0.001). Adjusted analysis confirmed that BAV-AS remained significantly associated with better outcome (hazard ratio: 0.53, 95% confidence interval: 0.33–0.86, P = 0.01). BAV-AS patients exhibited more favorable baseline profiles, less advanced cardiac damage, and better prognosis despite greater AS severity, highlighting the prognostic value of cardiac damage staging irrespective of valve morphology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41774425What 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.