Aortic Dilatation in Pediatric Patients with Bicuspid Aortic Valve: How the Choice of Nomograms May Change Prevalence.
Q-score
aortic dilation
aortic nomograms
bicuspid aortic valve
Journal
Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2075-4418
Titre abrégé: Diagnostics (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101658402
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Apr 2023
20 Apr 2023
Historique:
received:
09
02
2023
revised:
06
03
2023
accepted:
09
03
2023
medline:
16
5
2023
pubmed:
16
5
2023
entrez:
16
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Aortic dilation (AoD) is commonly reported in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and has been related to flow abnormalities and genetic predisposition. AoD-related complications are reported to be extremely rare in children. Conversely, an overestimate of AoD related to body size may lead to excess diagnoses and negatively impact quality of life and an active lifestyle. In the present study, we compared the diagnosis performance of the newly introduced Q-score (based on a machine-learning algorithm) versus the traditional Z-score in a large consecutive pediatric cohort with BAV. Prevalence and progression of AoD were evaluated in 281 pediatric patients ages > 5 and < 18 years at first observation, 249 of whom had isolated BAV and 32 had BAV associated with aortic coarctation (CoA-BAV). An additional group of 24 pediatric patients with isolated CoA was considered. Measurements were made at the level of the aortic annulus, Valsalva sinuses, sinotubular aorta, and proximal ascending aorta. Both Z-scores using traditional nomograms and the new Q-score were calculated at baseline and at followup (mean 4.5 years). A dilation of the proximal ascending aorta was suggested by traditional nomograms (Z-score > 2) in 31.2% of patients with isolated BAV and 18.5% with CoA-BAV at baseline and in 40.7% and 33.3%, respectively, at followup. No significant dilation was found in patients with isolated CoA. Using the new Q-score calculator, ascending aorta dilation was detected in 15.4% of patients with BAV and 18.5% with CoA-BAV at baseline and in 15.8% and 3.7%, respectively, at followup. AoD was significantly related to the presence and degree of aortic stenosis (AS) but not to aortic regurgitation (AR). No AoD-related complications occurred during the followup. Our data confirm the presence of ascending aorta dilation in a consistent subgroup of pediatric patients with isolated BAV, with progression during followup, while AoD was less common when CoA was associated with BAV. A positive correlation was found with the prevalence and degree of AS, but not with AR. Finally, the nomograms used may significantly influence the prevalence of AoD, especially in children, with a possible overestimation by traditional nomograms. This concept requires prospective validation in long-term followup.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Aortic dilation (AoD) is commonly reported in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and has been related to flow abnormalities and genetic predisposition. AoD-related complications are reported to be extremely rare in children. Conversely, an overestimate of AoD related to body size may lead to excess diagnoses and negatively impact quality of life and an active lifestyle. In the present study, we compared the diagnosis performance of the newly introduced Q-score (based on a machine-learning algorithm) versus the traditional Z-score in a large consecutive pediatric cohort with BAV.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
Prevalence and progression of AoD were evaluated in 281 pediatric patients ages > 5 and < 18 years at first observation, 249 of whom had isolated BAV and 32 had BAV associated with aortic coarctation (CoA-BAV). An additional group of 24 pediatric patients with isolated CoA was considered. Measurements were made at the level of the aortic annulus, Valsalva sinuses, sinotubular aorta, and proximal ascending aorta. Both Z-scores using traditional nomograms and the new Q-score were calculated at baseline and at followup (mean 4.5 years).
RESULTS
RESULTS
A dilation of the proximal ascending aorta was suggested by traditional nomograms (Z-score > 2) in 31.2% of patients with isolated BAV and 18.5% with CoA-BAV at baseline and in 40.7% and 33.3%, respectively, at followup. No significant dilation was found in patients with isolated CoA. Using the new Q-score calculator, ascending aorta dilation was detected in 15.4% of patients with BAV and 18.5% with CoA-BAV at baseline and in 15.8% and 3.7%, respectively, at followup. AoD was significantly related to the presence and degree of aortic stenosis (AS) but not to aortic regurgitation (AR). No AoD-related complications occurred during the followup.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our data confirm the presence of ascending aorta dilation in a consistent subgroup of pediatric patients with isolated BAV, with progression during followup, while AoD was less common when CoA was associated with BAV. A positive correlation was found with the prevalence and degree of AS, but not with AR. Finally, the nomograms used may significantly influence the prevalence of AoD, especially in children, with a possible overestimation by traditional nomograms. This concept requires prospective validation in long-term followup.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37189592
pii: diagnostics13081490
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13081490
pmc: PMC10137718
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Heart. 2006 Oct;92(10):1496-500
pubmed: 16547208
Diagnostics (Basel). 2022 Jul 20;12(7):
pubmed: 35885654
BMC Med Genet. 2014 Feb 24;15:23
pubmed: 24564502
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2005 Dec;18(12):1440-63
pubmed: 16376782
Am J Cardiol. 2005 Sep 1;96(5):718-21
pubmed: 16125502
Am J Cardiol. 2010 Mar 15;105(6):888-94
pubmed: 20211339
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Aug 12;9:922353
pubmed: 36035900
Pediatr Cardiol. 2018 Mar;39(3):509-517
pubmed: 29188316
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015 Oct;42(4):954-63
pubmed: 25644073
Pediatr Cardiol. 2021 Jun;42(5):1133-1140
pubmed: 33864103
Eur J Echocardiogr. 2010 Apr;11(3):223-44
pubmed: 20375260
JAMA. 2011 Sep 14;306(10):1104-12
pubmed: 21917581
Cardiol Young. 2021 Dec;31(12):1962-1968
pubmed: 33843540
J Clin Med. 2020 Jan 21;9(2):
pubmed: 31972995
Echocardiography. 2017 Jul;34(7):1029-1034
pubmed: 28497541
Int J Cardiol. 2021 Jun 15;333:90-93
pubmed: 33757790
Can J Cardiol. 2022 May;38(5):557-559
pubmed: 35346796
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 Mar;13(3):e009675
pubmed: 32178536
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2009 Jan;22(1):1-23; quiz 101-2
pubmed: 19130998
Am J Cardiol. 2009 Oct 1;104(7):1001-6
pubmed: 19766771
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 Mar;13(3):e009717
pubmed: 32178537
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019 Apr 1;55(4):704-713
pubmed: 30380029
Can J Cardiol. 2022 May;38(5):688-694
pubmed: 35093466
Am J Cardiol. 2017 Jul 1;120(1):131-136
pubmed: 28483205
Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2021 Mar;31(3):510-520
pubmed: 33260267
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013 Jul;6(4):499-507
pubmed: 23771987
Int J Cardiol. 2015 Dec 15;201:400-7
pubmed: 26310986
Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2020 Jul - Aug;63(4):419-424
pubmed: 32599027
Heart. 2012 Jul;98(13):1014-9
pubmed: 22668868
Diagnostics (Basel). 2021 Feb 02;11(2):
pubmed: 33540834
J Pediatr. 2010 Sep;157(3):445-9
pubmed: 20400103