Prevalence of left ventricle non-compaction criteria in adult patients with bicuspid aortic valve versus healthy control subjects. Issue 2 (3rd October 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Shen, Mylène; Capoulade, Romain; Tastet, Lionel; Guzzetti, Ezequiel; Clavel, Marie-Annick; Salaun, Erwan; Bédard, Élisabeth; Arsenault, Marie; Chetaille, Philippe; Tizón-Marcos, Helena; Le Ven, Florent; Pibarot, Philippe; Larose, Éric
• Is Part Of: Open heart. Volume 5:Issue 2(2018)
• Publication Date: 2018-10-03
• Subjects: bicuspid aortic valve -- left ventricle non-compaction -- hypertrabeculation -- cardiomyopathy; Cardiology -- Periodicals; Heart -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Heart -- Diseases -- Patients -- Periodicals; 616.12005
• DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2018-000869
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2398-595X

Abstract

Abstract : Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the prevalence of left ventricle non-compaction (LVNC) criteria (or hypertrabeculation) in a cohort of patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and healthy control subjects (CTL) without cardiovascular disease using cardiovascular MR (CMR). Methods: 79 patients with BAV and 85 CTL with tricuspid aortic valve and free of known cardiovascular disease underwent CMR to evaluate the presence of LVNC criteria. The left ventricle was assessed at end-systole and end-diastole, in the short-axis, two-chamber and four-chamber views and divided into the 16 standardised myocardial segments. LVNC was assessed using the non-compacted/compacted (NC/C) myocardium ratio and was considered to be present if at least one of the myocardial segments had a NC/C ratio superior to the cut-off values defined in previous studies: Jenni et al (>2.0 end-systole); Petersen et al (>2.3 end-diastole); or Fazio et al (>2.5 end-diastole). Results: 15 CTL (17.6%) vs 8 BAV (10.1%) fulfilled Jenni et al 's criterion; 69 CTL (81.2%) vs 49 BAV (62.0%) fulfilled Petersen et al 's criterion; and 66 CTL (77.6%) vs 43 BAV (54.4%) fulfilled Fazio et al 's criterion. Petersen et al and Fazio et al 's LVNC criteria were met more often by CTL (p=0.006 and p=0.002, respectively) than patients with BAV, whereas this difference was not statistically significant according to Jenni et al 's criterion (p=0.17). In multivariable analyses, after adjusting for age, sex, the presence of significant valve dysfunction (>mild stenosis or >mild regurgitation), indexed LV mass, indexed LV end-diastolic volume and LV ejection fraction, BAV was not associated with any of the three LVNC criteria. Conclusion: Patients with BAV do not harbour more LVNC than the general population and there is no evidence that they are at higher risk for the development of LVNC cardiomyopathy.