Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 12, 2025

Standardized Technique of Aortic Valve Re-implantation for Valve-sparing Aortic Root Replacement
Published on: December 11, 2017
Aortic Stenosis Progression, Cardiac Damage, and Survival: Comparison Between Bicuspid and Tricuspid Aortic Valves
Li-Tan Yang1, Amber Boler2, Jose R Medina-Inojosa2
1Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA; Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Insights
Tricuspid aortic valve stenosis (TAV-AS) patients show similar progression but higher cardiac damage and mortality than bicuspid aortic valve stenosis (BAV-AS) patients. Modifiable risk factors are key for BAV-AS prevention.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Valvular Heart Disease
- Echocardiography
Background:
- Aortic stenosis (AS) is a common valvular heart disease.
- Differences in AS progression and AS-related cardiac damage (AS-CD) between tricuspid aortic valve AS (TAV-AS) and bicuspid aortic valve AS (BAV-AS) are not well understood.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare AS progression rates, AS-CD incidence and determinants, and survival between TAV-AS and BAV-AS patients.
- To identify factors influencing AS progression and AS-CD in both groups.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective study of patients with baseline peak aortic valve velocity ≥2.5 m/s and LVEF ≥50%.
- Analysis of 4,818 follow-up echocardiograms for multiparametric AS progression and AS-CD.
- Comparison of clinical characteristics, AS progression, AS-CD, and survival between BAV-AS (n=330) and TAV-AS (n=581) cohorts.
Main Results:
- AS progression rates were similar between BAV-AS and TAV-AS.
- BAV-AS patients had larger aortic annuli but similar peakV and MPG compared to TAV-AS.
- TAV-AS patients exhibited a higher incidence of AS-CD and significantly worse survival at 12 years compared to BAV-AS patients (p<0.0001).
- Independent determinants of rapid progression differed: male sex and baseline AS severity for TAV-AS; age, baseline AS severity, and cardiac risk factors for BAV-AS.
- BAV morphology was independently protective against AS-CD.
Conclusions:
- AS progression rates are similar between TAV-AS and BAV-AS.
- Rapid AS progression did not impact survival in this cohort.
- TAV-AS is associated with significantly higher AS-CD and mortality, with BAV morphology being protective.
- Management strategies should focus on the overall AS burden for TAV-AS and modifiable risk factors for BAV-AS.
Objectives:
This study sought to compare aortic stenosis (AS) progression rates, AS-related cardiac damage (AS-CD) indicator incidence and determinants, and survival between patients with tricuspid aortic valve (TAV)-AS and those with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV)-AS.
Background:
Differences in AS progression and AS-CD between patients with BAV and patients with TAV are unknown.
Methods:
We retrospectively studied consecutive patients with baseline peak aortic valve velocity (peakV) ≥2.5 m/s and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50%. Follow-up echocardiograms (n = 4,818) provided multiparametric AS progression rates and AS-CD.
Results:
The study included 330 BAV (age 54 ± 14 years) and 581 patients with TAV (age 72 ± 11 years). At last echocardiogram (median: 5.9 years; interquartile range: 3.9 to 8.5 years), BAV-AS exhibited similar peakV and mean pressure gradient (MPG) as TAV-AS, but larger calculated aortic valve area due to larger aortic annulus (p < 0.0001). Multiparametric progression rates were similar between BAV-AS and TAV-AS (all p ≥ 0.08) and did not predict age-/sex-adjusted survival (p ≥ 0.45). Independent determinants of rapid progression were male sex and baseline AS severity for TAV (all p ≤ 0.024), and age, baseline AS severity, and cardiac risk factors (age interaction: p = 0.02) for BAV (all p ≤ 0.005). At 12 years, patients with TAV-AS had a higher incidence of AS-CD than BAV-AS patients (p < 0.0001), resulting in significantly worse survival compared to BAV-AS (p < 0.0001). AS-CD were independently determined by multiple factors (MPG, age, sex, comorbidities, cardiac function; all p ≤ 0.039), and BAV was independently protective of most AS-CD (all p ≤ 0.05).
Conclusions:
In this cohort, TAV-AS and BAV-AS progression rates were similar. Rapid progression did not affect survival and was determined by cardiac risk factors for BAV-AS (particularly in patients with BAV <60 years of age) and unmodifiable factors for TAV-AS. AS-CD and mortality were significantly higher in TAV-AS. Independent determinants of AS-CD were multifactorial, and BAV morphology was AS-CD protective. Therefore, the totality of AS burden (cardiac damage) is clinically crucial for TAV-AS, whereas attention to modifiable risk factors may be preventive for BAV-AS.
More Related Videos
12:17Full-root Aortic Valve Replacement by Stentless Aortic Xenografts in Patients with Small Aortic Roots
Published on: May 21, 2017
06:51Author Spotlight: Development of a Minimally Invasive Large-Animal Model for Reliable and Reproducible Cardiovascular Research
Published on: October 20, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Aortic Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests
Mitral Stenosis I: Introduction
Aortic Regurgitation I: Introduction
Mitral Stenosis II: Clinical features and Diagnostic Tests
Aortic Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Mitral Regurgitation I: Introduction