4.6 Article

Dynamic Normal Aortic Root Diameters: Implications for Aortic Root Reconstruction

Journal

ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY
Volume 91, Issue 2, Pages 485-489

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2010.10.058

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. The main aim of this study is to determine the normal diameter and the relationship of aortic root components in healthy adults, and to provide a morphologic foundation for future clinical applications. Methods. Echocardiography was performed in 314 normal subjects who were divided into five groups according to age. Dynamic aortic root diameters were measured and normalized to body surface area. Averages of these dynamic diameters were calculated for each age group and by gender, and differences between them were tested. Correlation coefficients were also determined between the dynamic diameters and age, body surface area, weight, and height. Aortic root diameters were also tested and compared between the end-diastole and the mid-systole. Results. Normalized diameters for the dynamic aortic root varied among the age groups. There were apparent relationships between the dynamic diameters and age, body surface area, weight, and height (p < 0.01). The normalized diameters were similar between both genders within each age group (p > 0.05). Each part of the aortic root expanded and contracted proportionally and harmoniously during the cardiac cycle. The ratio of the aortic valve annulus to the sinus of Valsalva, the sinustube joint, and the proximal ascending aorta were 0.70, 0.85, and 0.78 at the end-diastole, respectively, and 0.71, 0.85 and 0.78 at the mid-systole, respectively. Conclusions. The dynamic diameters of aortic roots of healthy adults were augmented with an increase according to age, body surface area, weight, and height. The results are of applicable value to aortic valve repair. (Ann Thorac Surg 2011;91:485-90) (C) 2011 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available