Incidence of bicuspid valve related aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ashley R. Wilson-Smith, Aditya Eranki, Benjamin Muston, Harish Kamalanathan, Amanda Yung, Michael L. Williams, Prachi Sahai, Caroline Zi, Hector Michelena

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: The true incidence of bicuspid valve-related aortic dissection (AD) is extremely difficult to ascertain. This review aimed to provide the reported cumulative incidence of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV)-related AD in actively monitored study populations. Methods: Four electronic databases were used to perform literature searches. A meta-analysis of proportions or means were performed for categorical and continuous variables, as appropriate. Survival data was calculated from the aggregation of Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves from the included studies, where reported. Results: A total of 4,330 patients were identified in eleven studies. A cumulative incidence of bicuspid valve-related AD of 0.6% across a median follow-up time of 9 years was identified. Actuarial survival across this monitored population at 1, 3, 5 and 10 years was 97.2%, 96.7%, 92.45%, and 81.1%, respectively. Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis identified a low incidence of AD across the examined follow-up period. Large, prospective studies involving early identification of bicuspid valve pathology, recruitment, and follow-up of BAV cohorts with comparison to the baseline population are required to most accurately determine the outcomes of these patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)363-368
Number of pages6
JournalAnnals of Cardiothoracic Surgery
Volume11
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2022

Keywords

  • Aortic dissection (ad)
  • Bicuspid aortic valve (bav)
  • Cumulative incidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Incidence of bicuspid valve related aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this