Congenital unicuspid aortic valve stenosis in siblings

Aortic Valve Calcium Score: Applications in Clinical Practice and Scientific Research-A Narrative Review

In this narrative review, we investigate the essential role played by the computed tomography Aortic Valve Calcium Score (AVCS) in the cardiovascular diagnostic landscape, with a special focus on its implications for clinical practice and scientific research. Calcific aortic valve stenosis is the most prevalent type of aortic stenosis (AS) in industrialized countries, and due to the aging population, its prevalence is increasing. While transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) remains the gold standard, AVCS stands out as an essential complementary tool in evaluating patients with AS. The advantage of AVCS is its independence from flow; this allows for a more precise evaluation of patients with discordant findings in TTE. Further clinical applications of AVCS include in the assessment of patients before transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), as it helps in predicting outcomes and provides prognostic information post-TAVR. Additionally, we describe different AVCS thresholds regarding gender and the anatomical variations of the aortic valve. Finally, we discuss various scientific studies where AVCS was applied. As AVCS has some limitations, due to the pathophysiologies of AS extending beyond calcification and gender differences, scientists strive to validate contrast-enhanced AVCS. Furthermore, research on developing radiation-free methods of measuring calcium content is ongoing.

Aortic Valve Repair of a Stenotic Unicuspid Aortic Valve in Young Patients

BACKGROUND

The unicuspid aortic valve (UAV) is a well-described pediatric congenital abnormality, with incidence of 0.02% in the general population. Bicuspidization has been described as a potential surgical option to repair this defect.

METHODS

Seventeen symptomatic young patients with a unicuspid valve combined with either valve insufficiency or valve stenosis underwent aortic valve (AV) bicuspidization procedure by using an equine pericardium. In addition to bicuspidization, 8 patients underwent aortic ring implantation and 5 patients underwent supracoronary replacement of the aorta.

RESULTS

Our results show safety of the bicuspidization procedure. No deaths occurred during our average follow-up period of 26 months. Freedom from reoperation for any valve-related reason was 100% during this follow-up period. We observed a statistically significant increase in the AV area from 0.8 ± 0.1 cm² to 2.8 ± 0.7 cm² (p < 0.01), a statistically significant decrease in the mean systolic pressure gradient from 36 ± 13.3 mm Hg to 9 ± 4 mm Hg (p < 0.001), a statistically significant decrease in aortic insufficiency grade from 2.1 ± 1.0 to 0.6 ± 0.7 (p < 0.01) before and after bicuspidization, respectively, and a statistically significant decrease in the left ventricular end-diastolic diameter from 49.88 ± 5.11 mm to 40.46 ± 7.20 mm (p < 0.0005) and a statistically significant increase of the left ventricular ejection fraction from 56% ± 8.20% to 64% ± 7.83% at the time of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

From our study, bicuspidization is an attractive surgical option to repair UAV, particularly in young patients who do not want to be subjected to long-term anticoagulation therapy or who refuse a more traditional surgical approach, such as Ross procedure, for reasons described previously.