Skip to main content

Table 2 Valve pathologies and morphologies (values are mean ± SD)

From: Impact of standardized computed tomographic angiography for minimally invasive mitral and tricuspid valve surgery

  CT-A
(n = 63)
other CT
(n = 35)
no CT
(n = 45)
p-value
Mitral valve
 endocarditis, n (%) 0 (0) 2 (6) 7 (16) < 0.01
Function
 regurgitation, n (%) 59 (94) 34 (97) 43 (96) 0.12
 grade > II, n (%) 56 (89) 32 (91) 38 (85) 0.62
Etiology
 primary
  calcific degeneration, n (%) 4 (7) 3 (9) 6 (14) 0.41
  AML prolapse, n (%) 4 (7) 4 (11.4) 1 (2) 0.25
  PML prolapse, n (%) 28 (47) 11 (31) 12 (29) 0.11
  flail leaflet, n (%) 10 (17) 3 (9) 4 (10) 0.51
  M. Barlow, n (%) 5 (8) 2 (6) 6 (14) 0.53
  infective/rheumatic, n (%) 0 (0) 2 (6) 7 (17) < 0.01
  valvular cleft, n (%) 1 (2) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1.00
 secondary
  ring dilatation, n (%) 7 (12) 10 (29) 6 (14) 0.11
  failed MitraClip, n (%) 1 (2) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1.00
Tricuspid valve
Pathology
  regurgitation, n (%) 11 (100) 15 (100) 10 (100) 1.00
  grade > II, n (%) 3 (27) 6 (40) 5 (50) 0.31
  ring dilatation, n (%) 11 (100) 15 (100) 10 (100) 1.00
  diameter (mm; mean ± SD) 42.2 ± 4.4 41.7 ± 4.5 43.4 ± 3.2 0.62
  1. Patients with preoperative CT angiography (CT-A, n = 63) compared to patients with non-contrast CT (other CT, n = 35) and patients without preoperative CT scan (no CT, n = 45). Post-hoc comparison: Endocarditis: CT-A vs. other: p = 0.12, CT-A vs. no CT: p < 0.01, other CT vs no CT: p = 0.29; infective/rheumatic: CT-A vs. other: p = 0.14, CT-A vs. no CT: p < 0.01, other CT vs no CT: p = 0.18
  2. AML anterior mitral leaflet, PML posterior mitral leaflet