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