Prevalence of Bicuspid Aortic Valve and Associated Aortopathy in Newborns in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abnormalities, Multiple
/ epidemiology
Aorta
/ abnormalities
Aortic Coarctation
/ epidemiology
Aortic Valve
/ diagnostic imaging
Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease
/ classification
Cross-Sectional Studies
Denmark
/ epidemiology
Echocardiography
Female
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Male
Prevalence
Sex Distribution
Journal
JAMA
ISSN: 1538-3598
Titre abrégé: JAMA
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7501160
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 02 2021
09 02 2021
Historique:
entrez:
9
2
2021
pubmed:
10
2
2021
medline:
17
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The prevalence and characteristics of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) are mainly reported from selected cohorts. BAV is associated with aortopathy, but it is unclear if it represents a fetal developmental defect or is secondary to abnormal valve dynamics. To determine the prevalence of BAV and BAV subtypes and to describe the associated aortopathy in a large, population-based cohort of newborns. The Copenhagen Baby Heart Study was a cross-sectional, population-based study open to all newborns born in Copenhagen between April 1, 2016, and October 31, 2018. Newborns with BAV were matched 1:2 to newborns with a tricuspid aortic valve (non-BAV group) on sex, singleton/twin pregnancy, gestational age, weight, and age at time of examination. Transthoracic echocardiography within 60 days after birth. Primary outcome was BAV prevalence and types, ie, number of raphes and spatial orientation of raphes or cusps (no raphes), according to the classification system of Sievers and Schmidtke (classified as type 0, 1, or 2, with numbers indicating the number of raphes). Secondary outcome was valve function and BAV-associated aortopathy, defined as aortic diameter z score of 3 or greater or coarctation. In total, 25 556 newborns (51.7% male; mean age, 12 [SD, 8] days) underwent echocardiography. BAV was diagnosed in 196 newborns (prevalence, 0.77% [95% CI, 0.67%-0.88%]), with male-female ratio 2.1:1. BAV was classified as type 0 in 17 newborns (8.7% [95% CI, 5.5%-13.5%]), type 1 in 178 (90.8% [95% CI, 86.0%-94.1%]) (147 [75.0% {95% CI, 68.5%-80.5%}] right-left coronary raphe, 27 [13.8% {95% CI, 9.6%-19.3%}] right coronary-noncoronary raphe, 4 [2.0% {95% CI, 0.8%-5.1%}] left coronary-noncoronary raphe), and type 2 in 1 (0.5% [95% CI, 0.1%-2.8%]). Aortic regurgitation was more prevalent in newborns with BAV (n = 29 [14.7%]) than in those without BAV (1.3%) (absolute % difference, 13.4% [95% CI, 7.8%-18.9%]; P < .001). Newborns with BAV had higher flow velocities across the valve (0.67 [95% CI, 0.65-0.69] m/s vs 0.61 [95% CI, 0.60-0.62] m/s; mean difference, 0.06 m/s [95% CI, 0-0.1]) and larger aortic root and tubular ascending aortic diameters than those without BAV (10.7 [95% CI, 10.7-10.9] mm vs 10.3 [95% CI, 10.2-10.4] mm; mean difference, 0.43 mm [95% CI, 0.2-0.6 mm] and 9.8 [95% CI, 9.6-10.0] mm vs 9.4 [95% CI, 9.3-9.5] mm; mean difference, 0.46 mm [95% CI, 0.30-0.70], respectively) (P < .001 for all). Aortopathy was seen in 65 newborns (33.2%) with BAV (62 with aortic z score ≥3; 3 with coarctation). Among newborns in Copenhagen, the prevalence of BAV was 0.77%. Aortopathy was common in newborns with BAV, suggesting that it also represents a fetal malformation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33560321
pii: 2776200
doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.27205
pmc: PMC7873775
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
561-567Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
Cardiol Res Pract. 2012;2012:145202
pubmed: 23198270
N Engl J Med. 2014 May 15;370(20):1920-9
pubmed: 24827036
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2019 Jul;32(7):895-905.e2
pubmed: 31076139
JAMA. 2008 Sep 17;300(11):1317-25
pubmed: 18799444
Am J Cardiol. 2017 Jul 1;120(1):131-136
pubmed: 28483205
Can J Cardiol. 1999 Jan;15(1):48-52
pubmed: 10024858
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Oct;5(10):981-9
pubmed: 23058064
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007 May;133(5):1226-33
pubmed: 17467434
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 Jul;148(1):e1-e132
pubmed: 24939033
Heart. 2017 Sep;103(17):1323-1330
pubmed: 28490615
J Pediatr. 2010 Sep;157(3):445-9
pubmed: 20400103
Cardiol Young. 1999 Sep;9(5):488-98
pubmed: 10535829
Ann Pediatr Cardiol. 2018 May-Aug;11(2):143-147
pubmed: 29922011
Ann Thorac Surg. 2015 Jun;99(6):2101-7; discussion 2107-8
pubmed: 25921253
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Jun 22;55(25):2789-800
pubmed: 20579534
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2021 Feb;34(2):185-192
pubmed: 33189460
JAMA Cardiol. 2017 Mar 1;2(3):285-292
pubmed: 28052146
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Aug 26;64(8):832-9
pubmed: 25145529
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2017 Feb;18(2):74-82
pubmed: 27606785
Stat Med. 1998 Apr 30;17(8):857-72
pubmed: 9595616
Curr Opin Cardiol. 2016 Nov;31(6):585-592
pubmed: 27583373
J Transl Med. 2017 Apr 11;15(1):76
pubmed: 28399937
Am Heart J. 2005 Sep;150(3):513-5
pubmed: 16169333
Eur J Epidemiol. 2019 Jan;34(1):79-90
pubmed: 30306423
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017 Nov;10(11):
pubmed: 29138232
Circulation. 2008 May 27;117(21):2776-84
pubmed: 18506017
Jpn Heart J. 1988 Sep;29(5):661-70
pubmed: 3221443
Am J Cardiol. 1970 Jul;26(1):72-83
pubmed: 5427836
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002 Jun 19;39(12):1890-900
pubmed: 12084585
Int J Cardiol. 2018 Jan 1;250:120-121
pubmed: 29169750
Ann Thorac Surg. 2004 Jan;77(1):177-85
pubmed: 14726058
J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Sep 29;5(10):
pubmed: 27688238
Am J Cardiol. 2004 Mar 1;93(5):661-3
pubmed: 14996606
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2006 Dec;19(12):1413-30
pubmed: 17138024
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016 Feb;49(2):439-46
pubmed: 25787670
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2010 May;23(5):465-95; quiz 576-7
pubmed: 20451803
Am J Cardiol. 1984 Mar 1;53(6):849-55
pubmed: 6702637