4.6 Article

Ascending aorta elasticity in children with isolated bicuspid aortic valve

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 168, 期 2, 页码 1143-1146

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.11.080

关键词

Bicuspid aortic valve; Elasticity; Ascending aorta; Children; Congenital heart disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Aortic dilation is common in children with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) but aortic complications are infrequent. The aim of this study was to investigate elastic properties of the ascending aorta (AAo) and its relation to AAo size in children with isolated BAV without significant valve dysfunction. Methods: 24 children with isolated BAV and 24 healthy controls with tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) matched by gender, age and body surface area (BSA) were studied. Aortic strain (AS), aortic distensibility (DIS) and aortic stiffness index (SI) were derived from M-mode echocardiography at the AAo together with cuff blood pressure recordings. BAV children with dilated AAo (z score >= 2) and non dilated (z score<2) were compared. Results: BAV children had larger aortas than controls at the sinuses of Valsalva, sinotubular junction and AAo (p<0.05). AS was lower in BAV than in controls (10.15 +/- 4.93 vs 16.93 +/- 5.17 p=0.000), DIS was lower in BAV than in controls (8.51 +/- 3.90 vs 14.37 +/- 4.20 p=0.000) and SI was higher in BAV than in controls (7.19 +/- 4.45 vs 4.05 +/- 2.33 p=0.04). There were no significant differences in AS, DIS and SI between children with dilated and non-dilated AAo. AS, DIS and SI were not related to BSA, age or AAo size. Conclusions: AAo elasticity assessed by transthoracic echocardiography is impaired in BAV children without significant valve dysfunction compared to TAV children. Impaired elasticity seems to be independent from aortic dilation. Measuring aortic elasticity may help to identify children at greater risk for complications as adults. (c) 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据