Flow dynamics and systemic arterial stiffness distinguish bicuspid aortic valve aortopathy from heritable thoracic aortic disease

Clicks: 3
ID: 338219
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #157 of 157 articles by views in European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 157 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
AIMS: Bicuspid aortic valve-associated aortopathy (BAVA) and heritable thoracic aortic disease (HTAD) share clinical manifestations but may represent distinct pathophysiological entities. We aimed to compare morphological and haemodynamic profiles between both groups using cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) and non-invasive systemic haemodynamic assessment. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 185 patients (111 BAVA, 74 HTAD) were prospectively enrolled. CMR 4D-flow assessed aortic distensibility (ADCMR), pulse wave velocity (PWVCMR), global wall shear stress (WSSCMR) and energy loss (ELCMR). Oscillometry assessed systemic PWVM, augmentation index (AIxM) and systemic vascular resistance (SVRM). Composite adverse aortic events (AAE) comprised acute aortic syndrome, cardiovascular death or guideline diameter-based indication for surgery over 42.1±17.6 months. BAVA showed greater tubular ascending aorta and sinotubular junction dilation, ascending aorta WSSCMR (0.42±0.18 vs 0.28±0.12 Pa, p=0.020), ELCMR (19.8±8.4 vs. 12.3±6.1 mW, p<0.001) and ADCMR (6.1 ± 3.5 vs. 4.8 ± 2.9 ×10-3 mmHg-1, p=0.023), yet lower systemic stiffness than HTAD (PWVM 6.2±1.7 vs 7.8±2.1 m/s; AIxM 12.1±7.6 vs 18.4±9.2%; both p<0.001). AAE rates were similar. In exploratory aetiology-specific analyses, ascending aorta WSSCMR was associated with events in BAVA (HR 8.92, 95% CI 2.85-27.95) and systemic PWVM in HTAD (HR 2.16, 95% CI 1.30-3.57). CONCLUSION: BAVA and HTAD show distinct morphological and haemodynamic phenotypes: BAVA with focal dilation, elevated WSSCMR/ELCMR and preserved systemic function; HTAD with reduced local distensibility and greater systemic stiffness. These aetiology-specific predictors are exploratory and require external validation.
Reference Key
openalex_W7225111728 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Diego Segura-Rodríguez, Miguel Morales-García, Eduardo Moreno Escobar, Pilar Martín de la Fuente, Francisco Burillo Gómez, José Antonio Miras Gómez, Elvira Pérez Cuenca, Inés Uribe, Rocío García‐Orta
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ehjci/jeag306
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jeag306
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.