Bicuspid stenotic aortic valves: clinical characteristics and morphological assessment using MRI and echocardiography

Background Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is one of the most common congenital heart defects with a population prevalence of 0.5% to 1.3%. Identifying patients with BAV is clinically relevant because BAV is associated with aortic stenosis, endocarditis and ascending aorta pathology. Methods and Results Patients with severe aortic stenosis necessitating aortic valve replacement surgery were included in this study. All dissected aortic valves Were stored in the biobank of the University Medical Centre Utrecht. Additionally to the morphological assessment of the aortic valve by the surgeon and pathologist, echocardiographic and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) images were evaluated. A total of 80 patients were included of whom 32 (40%) were diagnosed with BAV by the surgeon (gold standard). Patients with BAV were significantly younger (55 vs 71 years) and were more frequently male. Notably, a significant difference was found between the surgeon and pathologist in determining valve morphology. MRI was performed in 33% of patients. MRI could assess valve morphology in 96% vs 73% with echocardiography. The sensitivity of MRI for BAV in a population of patients with severe aortic stenosis was higher than echocardiography (75% vs 55%), whereas specificity was better with the latter (91% vs 79%). Typically, the ascending aorta was larger in patients with BAV. Conclusion Among unselected patients with severe aortic valve stenosis, a high percentage of patients with BAV were found. Imaging and assessment of the aortic valve morphology when stenotic is challengin

Aortic stiffness in aortic stenosis assessed by cardiovascular MRI: a comparison between bicuspid and tricuspid valves

Objectives To compare aortic size and stiffness parameters on MRI between bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) patients with aortic stenosis (AS). Methods MRI was performed in 174 patients with asymptomatic moderate-severe AS (mean AVAI 0.57 ± 0.14 cm2/m2) and 23 controls on 3T scanners. Valve morphology was available/analysable in 169 patients: 63 BAV (41 type-I, 22 type-II) and 106 TAV. Aortic cross-sectional areas were measured at the level of the pulmonary artery bifurcation. The ascending and descending aorta (AA, DA) distensibility, and pulse wave velocity (PWV) around the aortic arch were calculated. Results The AA and DA areas were lower in the controls, with no difference in DA distensibility or PWV, but slightly lower AA distensibility than in the patient group. With increasing age, there was a decrease in distensibility and an increase in PWV. After correcting for age, the AA maximum cross-sectional area was higher in bicuspid vs. tricuspid patients (12.97 [11.10, 15.59] vs. 10.06 [8.57, 12.04] cm2, p < 0.001), but there were no significant differences in AA distensibility (p = 0.099), DA distensibility (p = 0.498) or PWV (p = 0.235). Patients with BAV type-II valves demonstrated a significantly higher AA distensibility and lower PWV compared to type-I, despite a trend towards higher AA area. Conclusions In patients with significant AS, BAV patients do not have increased aortic stiffness compared to those with TAV despite increased ascending aortic dimensions. Those with type-II BAV have less aortic stiffness despite greater dimensions. These results demonstrate a dissociation between aortic dilatation and stiffness and suggest that altered flow patterns may play a role. Key Points • Both cellular abnormalities secondary to genetic differences and abnormal flow patterns have been implicated in the pathophysiology of aortic dilatation and increased vascular complications associated with bicuspid aortic valves (BAV). • We demonstrate an increased ascending aortic size in patients with BAV and moderate to severe AS compared to TAV and controls, but no difference in aortic stiffness parameters, therefore suggesting a dissociation between dilatation and stiffness. • Sub-group analysis showed greater aortic size but lower stiffness parameters in those with BAV type-II AS compared to BAV type-I

Differential flow improvements after valve replacements in bicuspid aortic valve disease: a cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment

Background Abnormal aortic flow patterns in bicuspid aortic valve disease (BAV) may be partly responsible for the associated aortic dilation. Aortic valve replacement (AVR) may normalize flow patterns and potentially slow the concomitant aortic dilation. We therefore sought to examine differences in flow patterns post AVR. Methods Ninety participants underwent 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance: 30 BAV patients with prior AVR (11 mechanical, 10 bioprosthetic, 9 Ross procedure), 30 BAV patients with a native aortic valve and 30 healthy subjects. Results The majority of subjects with mechanical AVR or Ross showed normal flow pattern (73% and 67% respectively) with near normal rotational flow values (7.2 ± 3.9 and 10.6 ± 10.5 mm2/ms respectively vs 3.8 ± 3.1 mm2/s for healthy subjects; both p > 0.05); and reduced in-plane wall shear stress (0.19 ± 0.13 N/m2for mechanical AVR vs. 0.40 ± 0.28 N/m2 for native BAV, p  0.05), and a similar pattern for wall shear stress. Data before and after AVR (n = 16) supported these findings: mechanical AVR showed a significant reduction in rotational flow (30.4 ± 16.3 → 7.3 ± 4.1 mm2/ms; p < 0.05) and in-plane wall shear stress (0.47 ± 0.20 → 0.20 ± 0.13 N/m2; p < 0.05), whereas these parameters remained similar in the bioprosthetic AVR group. Conclusions Abnormal flow patterns in BAV disease tend to normalize after mechanical AVR or Ross procedure, in contrast to the remnant abnormal flow pattern after bioprosthetic AVR. This may in part explain different aortic growth rates post AVR in BAV observed in the literature, but requires confirmation in a prospective study