Ascending aorta mechanics in bicuspid aortopathy: controversy or fact?

Abstract

Bicuspid aortic valve is the most common congenital cardiovascular defect, often associated with proximal aortic dilatation, and the ideal management strategy is debated. The inconsistency in previous and present guideline recommendations emphasizes the insufficiency of the maximal diameter as the sole criterion for prophylactic repair. Our ability to guide clinical decisions may improve through an understanding of the mechanical properties of ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms in bicuspid compared to tricuspid aortic valve patients and non-aneurysmal aortas, because dissection and rupture are aortic wall mechanical failures. Such an understanding of the mechanical properties has been attempted by several authors, and this article addresses whether there is a controversy in the accumulated knowledge. The available mechanical studies are briefly reviewed, discussing factors such as age, sex, and the region of mechanical examination that may be responsible for the lack of unanimity in the reported findings. The rationale for acquiring layer-specific properties is presented along with the main results from our recent study. No mechanical vulnerability of ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms was evidenced in bicuspid aortic valve patients, corroborating present conservative guidelines concerning the management of bicuspid aortopathy. Weakening and additional vulnerability was evidenced in aged patients and those with coexisting valve pathology, aortic root dilatation, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. Discussion of these results from age- and sex-matched subjects, accounting for the region- and layer-specific aortic heterogeneity, in relation to intact wall results and histologic confirmation, helps to reconcile previous findings and affords a universal interpretation of ascending aorta mechanics in bicuspid aortopathy.

Controversy handled well, ends in veracity

“…Iliopoulos and his colleague reviewed the literature and discussed the factors such as age, sex and the region of mechanical examination that may be responsible for the lack of unanimity. 2 They put forth that discussing the results from age-and sex-matched subjects, accounting for the region-and layer-specific aortic heterogeneity, concerning intact wall results and histologic confirmation that will help to reconcile previous findings and affords a universal interpretation of ascending aorta mechanics in bicuspid aortopathy. Although the previous studies have examined the uniaxial tension, biaxial tension and bulge inflation tests, there is little information about the failure properties of the aorta in the radial direction, which needs analysis in the future.…”