Focus on a rare clinical entity: unicuspid aortic valve disease

References

• Subramanian R, Olson LJ, Edwards WD Surgical pathology of pure aortic stenosis: a study of 374 cases. Mayo Clin Proc 1984;60:247–254.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh S, Ghayal P, Mathur A, et al. Unicuspid unicommissural aortic valve: an extremely rare congenital anomaly. Texas Hear Inst J. 2015;42(3):273–276.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts WC, Jong MK, Hamilton C Comparison of valve structure, valve weight, and severity of the valve obstruction in 1849 patients having isolated aortic valve replacement for aortic valve stenosis (with or without associated aortic regurgitation) studied at 3 different medical centers. Circulation. 2005;112(25):3919–3929.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kowalczys A, Bohdan M, Fijałkowska J, et al. Rare case of an adult with a stenotic acommissural unicuspid aortic valve. Can J Cardiol 2020;19
   Google Scholar
• Brantley HP, Nekkanti R, Anderson CA, et al. Three-dimensional echocardiographic features of unicuspid aortic valve stenosis correlate with surgical findings. Echocardiography. 2012;29(8):204–207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kawahara Y, Suzuki K, Takahara S, et al. Congenital unicuspid aortic valve stenosis in siblings. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;62(9):567–569.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Krepp JM, Roman MJ, Devereux RB, et al. Bicuspid and unicuspid aortic valves: different phenotypes of the same disease? Insight from the GenTAC registry. Congenit Hear Dis 2017;12(6)740–745
   Google Scholar
• Sniecinski RM, Shanewise JS, Glas KE Transesophageal echocardiography of a unicuspid aortic valve. Anesth Analg. 2009;108(3):788–789.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss RM, Chu Y, Brooks RM, et al. Discovery of an experimental model of unicuspid aortic valve. J Am Heart Assoc 2018;7(13).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fealey ME, Edwards WD, Miller DV, et al. Unicommissural aortic valves: gross, histological, and immunohistochemical analysis of 52 cases (1978-2008). Cardiovasc Pathol. 2012;21(4):324–333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sabet HY, Edwards WD, Tazelaar HD, et al. Congenitally bicuspid aortic valves: A surgical pathology study of 542 cases (1991 through 1996) and a literature review of 2,715 additional cases. Mayo Clin Proc. 1999;74(1):14–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noly PE, Basmadjian L, Bouhout I, et al. New insights into unicuspid aortic valve disease in adults: not just a subtype of bicuspid aortic valves. Can J Cardiol. 2016;32(1):110–116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts WC, Ko JM Frequency by decades of unicuspid, bicuspid, and tricuspid aortic valves in adults having isolated aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis, with or without associated aortic regurgitation. Circulation. 2005;111(7):920–925.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schäfers HJ, Aicher D, Riodionycheva S, et al. Bicuspidization of the unicuspid aortic valve: a new reconstructive approach. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;85(6):2012–2018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoon S, Bleiziffer S, De BO, et al. Outcomes in transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valve stenosis. JACC. 2017;69(21):2579–2589.
   Google Scholar
• Baumgartner H, Cremer J, Eggebrecht H, et al. Comments on the guidelines (2017) of the ESC/EACTS on the management of valvular heart disease. Zeitschrift fur Herz Thorax- und Gefasschirurgie. 2018;32(3):208–217.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mookadam F, Thota VR, Garcia-Lopez AM, et al. Unicuspid aortic valve in adults: A systematic review. J Heart Valve Dis 2010;19(1):79–85
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ewen S, Karliova I, Weber P, et al. Echocardiographic criteria to detect unicuspid aortic valve morphology The proposed echocardiographic score appears to be a specific and sensitive method to distinguish UAV from BAV and TAV. Eur Hear J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019;1;20(1):40–44
   Google Scholar
• Naito S, Petersen J, Reichenspurner H, et al. The impact of coronary anomalies on the outcome in aortic valve surgery: comparison of bicuspid aortic valve versus tricuspid aortic valve morphotype†. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2018; 1;26(4):617–622
   Google Scholar
• Çinar T, Hayiroǧlu MI, Öz A, et al. Unicuspid aortic valve concomitant with interrupted aortic arch and severe aortic stenosis in an adult patient. Turk Kardiyoloji Dernegi Arsivi. 2019. p. 82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slostad BD, Witt CM, O’Leary PW, et al. Unicuspid aortic valve: demographics, comorbidities, echocardiographic features, and long-term outcomes. Circulation. 2019;26;140(22):1853–1855
   Google Scholar
• Matsushima S, Giebels C, Glenske M, et al. Unicuspid valve repair-what technique, which patch for which patient? Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2019 May 1;8(3):430–432.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu Y, Roselli EE, Idrees JJ, et al. Outcomes after operations for unicuspid aortic valve with or without ascending repair in adults. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;101(2):613–619.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butany J, Vaideeswar P, Dixit V, et al. Ascending aortic aneurysms in unicommissural aortic valve disease. Cardiovasc Pathol. 2009;18(1):11–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borger MA, Fedak PWM, Stephens EH, et al. The American Association for Thoracic Surgery consensus guidelines on bicuspid aortic valve-related aortopathy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Sug. 2018 Aug;156(2):473–480
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Entezari P, Schnell S, Mahadevia R, et al. From unicuspid to quadricuspid: influence of aortic valve morphology on aortic three-dimensional hemodynamics. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;40(6):1342–1346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guzzardi DG, Barker AJ, Van Ooij P, et al. Valve-related hemodynamics mediate human bicuspid aortopathy: insights from wall shear stress mapping. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66(8):892–900.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sievers H, Stierle U, Hachmann RMS, et al. New insights in the association between bicuspid aortic valve phenotype, aortic con fi guration and valve haemodynamics. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016 Feb;49(2):439–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keane MG, Wiegers SE, Plappert T, et al. Bicuspid aortic valves are associated with aortic dilatation out of proportion to coexistent valvular lesions. Circulation. 2000;102:III 35–I39.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mazine A, Ouzounian M Aortic valve replacement in young and middle-aged adults: looking beyond the tree that hides the forest. Ann Transl Med. 2017 Feb;5(4):92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aicher D, Fries R, Rodionycheva S, et al. Aortic valve repair leads to a low incidence of valve-related complications. Eur J Cardio Thoracic Surg. 2010;37:127–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michelena HI, Prakash SK, Della CA, et al. Bicuspid aortic valve identifying knowledge gaps and rising to the challenge from the international bicuspid aortic valve consortium (BAVCON). Circulation. 2014;129(25) 2691–704
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ, et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. 38, Eur Heart J. 2739–2786 p.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kawase I, Ozaki S, Yamashita H, et al. Aortic valve reconstruction of unicuspid aortic valve by tricuspidization using autologous pericardium. Ann Thorac Surg. 2012;94(4):1180–1184.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yanagawa B, Mazine A, El-Hamamsy I. Predictors of aortic valve repair failure. Innovations (Phila). 2019 Jun;14(3):199–208
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Von Stumm M, Petersen J, Westermann D, et al. Treatment strategies for mixed aortic valve disease in nonelderly patients. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2019;17(12):873–882
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sievers HH, Stierle U, Charitos EI, et al. A multicentre evaluation of the autograft procedure for young patients undergoing aortic valve replacement: update on the German ross registry. Eur J Cardio thoracic Surg. 2016;(49):217–218.
   Google Scholar
• David TE, David C, Woo A, et al. The Ross procedure: outcomes at 20 years. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;147(1):85–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalfa D, Mohammadi S, Kalavrouziotis D, et al. Long-term outcomes of the Ross procedure in adults with severe aortic stenosis: single-centre experience with 20 years of follow-up. Eur J Cardio Thoracic Surg. 2015;47(1):159–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Um KJ, McClure GR, Belley-Cote EP, et al. Hemodynamic outcomes of the ross procedure versus other aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Surg 2018;59(3):462–470
   Google Scholar
• De Sa M, Moshkovitz Y, Butany J, et al. Histologic abnormalities of the ascending aorta and pulmonary trunk in patients with bicuspid aortic valve disease: clinical relevance to the Ross procedure. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1999;118(4):588–596.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dionne PO, Wener E, Emmott A, et al. The Ross procedure: biomechanical properties of the pulmonary artery according to aortic valve phenotype. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2016;23:371–376.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armstrong J, Crawford J, Arnautovic J Unicuspid aortic valve replacement with development of complete heart block: A case report. Eur Hear J 2019 Mar 1;3(1).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agnihotri AK, Desai SC, Lai YQ, et al. Two distinct clinical presentations in adult unicuspid aortic valve. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;131(5):1169–1170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haunschild J, Misfeld M, Schroeter T, et al. Prevalence of permanent pacemaker implantation after conventional aortic valve replacement-a propensity-matched analysis in patients with a bicuspid or tricuspid aortic valve: a benchmark for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2020;58(1):130–137
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar