ライフサイエンスコーパス: bicuspid

1 lusal contact, and a fistula on a mandibular bicuspid.

2 dibular second bicuspids and maxillary first bicuspids.

3 icuspids and mandibular central incisors and bicuspids.

4 al ligament cells from periodontally healthy bicuspids.

5 es of all 6-year molars and first and second bicuspids.

6 Among 159 661 patients (7058 bicuspid, 152 603 tricuspid), 37 660 patients (3243 bicu

7 Among 159 661 patients (7058 bicuspid; 152 603 tricuspid), 3168 propensity-matched pa

8 secutive patients with aortic stenosis (2726 bicuspid; 79 096 tricuspid), 2691 propensity-score match

9 s, who exhibit a notably higher incidence of bicuspid anatomy compared with older populations.

10 alve (BAV) stenosis despite the exclusion of bicuspid anatomy in all pivotal clinical trials.

11 od and Drug Administration approval excluded bicuspid anatomy.

12 predicted risk of mortality, 1.7% [0.6%] for bicuspid and 1.7% [0.7%] for tricuspid).

13 d, 152 603 tricuspid), 37 660 patients (3243 bicuspid and 34 417 tricuspid) who were at low surgical

14 ignificantly different between patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis at 30 days (2.6%

15 68 propensity-matched pairs of patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis at low surgical r

16 pid), 2691 propensity-score matched pairs of bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis were analyzed (me

17 bset that were significantly greater in both bicuspid and tricuspid CAS cases with more severe valve

18 e immune response is occurring in cases with bicuspid and tricuspid CAS, involving circulating CD8 T

19 were no significant differences between the bicuspid and tricuspid groups in procedural complication

20 re was no significant difference between the bicuspid and tricuspid groups' rates of death at 30 days

21 stitial cells (VIC) obtained from calcified (bicuspid and tricuspid) versus control valves.

22 t foods, and particles were removed from all bicuspids and first molars at defined times after swallo

23 n the facial surface of maxillary molars and bicuspids and mandibular central incisors and bicuspids.

24 We have identified an MSX1second bicuspids and mandibular central incisors.

25 udes missing maxillary and mandibular second bicuspids and maxillary first bicuspids.

26 n males, while lippings were seen in molars, bicuspids, and mandibular incisors, with even gender dis

27 Bicuspid aortic stenosis accounts for almost 50% of pati

28 the current role of TAVR in the treatment of bicuspid aortic stenosis and for guiding physicians in c

29 oon-expandable transcatheter heart valves in bicuspid aortic stenosis are lacking.

30 Outcomes of TAVR in bicuspid aortic stenosis depend on valve morphology.

31 (14.5% versus 14.4%), whereas patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis had a statistically nonsignific

32 f transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic stenosis in patients at low surgical ris

33 catheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for bicuspid aortic stenosis in patients at low surgical ris

34 age 60 to 75 years with severe tricuspid or bicuspid aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR or surgical val

35 ing to an increasing number of patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR.

36 Patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis who receive transcatheter aorti

37 ce of a control group treated surgically for bicuspid aortic stenosis, randomized trials are needed t

38 ic stenosis were compared with biopsies from bicuspid aortic stenosis.

39 anscatheter heart valves in the treatment of bicuspid aortic stenosis.

40 f transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic stenosis.

41 yndrome (21.5% versus 3.1%; P<0.001) but not bicuspid aortic valve (3.6% versus 3.2%; P=0.77).

42 randomized clinical trial, 220 patients with bicuspid aortic valve (43 women; 46+/-13 years of age) w

43 Patients with bicuspid aortic valve (AV) stenosis were excluded from t

44 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) (39%) and Marfan syndrome (M

45 tic hemodynamics, with separate networks for bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) (994 in the training set and

46 o the presence of other risk factors such as bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and hypertension.

47 A shared genetic basis for familial bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and hypoplastic left heart s

48 Both bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and Marfan syndrome have bee

49 ic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) aortic stenosis (AS) versus

50 ay a role contributing to the progression of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) aortopathy.

51 The prevalence and characteristics of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) are mainly reported from sel

52 tic valve (TAV) replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease (TAV-in-BAV).

53 The correlation between bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease and aortopathy is no

54 ar ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease has not been previou

55 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease is a congenital defe

56 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease is frequently accomp

57 Ascending aortic dilation is important in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease, with increased risk

58 Familial clustering of HLHS and bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) has been observed, and pedig

59 Patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) have a higher risk of develo

60 al tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) in 172 and a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) in 66 subjects.

61 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is a common congenital heart

62 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is a heritable condition tha

63 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is a heritable congenital he

64 determine whether the morphologic subtype of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is associated with valve int

65 Importance: Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is considered an autosomal d

66 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is regarded as a relative co

67 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most common adult con

68 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most common congenita

69 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most common congenita

70 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most common congenita

71 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most prevalent congen

72 Thoracic aortic disease and bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) likely have a heritable comp

73 ittle is known about the association between bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) morphologic findings and the

74 increase in the proportion of patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) morphology as the age of the

75 ltered ascending aorta (AAo) hemodynamics in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) patients and its association

76 tic root in first-degree relatives (FDRs) of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) patients.

77 This large multicenter, international bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) registry aimed to define the

78 The bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) represents a complex anatomi

79 d to increased use of TAVR for patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) stenosis despite the exclusi

80 Participants with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) with aneurysm (n = 879), Mar

81 s with aortic coarctation (CoA) with/without bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), and healthy controls.

82 y who also exhibited LVOT defects, including bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), coarctation of the aorta (C

83 evelops in most patients with a congenitally bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), in others with this anomaly

84 dies have established familial clustering of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), presumably indicating genet

85 Dcbld2(-/-) mice have a high prevalence of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), spontaneous aortic valve ca

86 Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), the most common congenital

87 randomized, controlled trials have excluded bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), which is the most frequent

88 RATIONALE: The pathogenesis of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV)-associated aortopathy is poo

89 te the genetic relationship between HLHS and bicuspid aortic valve (BAV).

90 complex aortic valve anatomies, such as the bicuspid aortic valve (BAV).

91 flow alterations in patients with congenital bicuspid aortic valve (BAV).

92 efined compared to Marfan syndrome (MFS) and bicuspid aortic valve (BAV).

93 Nonsyndromic bicuspid aortic valve (nsBAV) is the most common congeni

94 Bicuspid aortic valve (odds ratio [OR], 2.20; 95% CI, 1.

95 R, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07-1.15), patients with a bicuspid aortic valve (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05-1.13), in-

96 85), ventricular septal defect (P=0.12), and bicuspid aortic valve (P=0.14) did not carry an increase

97 The aim of the BAVARD (Bicuspid Aortic Valve Anatomy and Relationship With Devi

98 th Sapien 3 and Evolut R/PRO implantation in bicuspid aortic valve anatomy; a higher rate of moderate

99 -dominant aortic valve disease consisting of bicuspid aortic valve and aortic valve calcification was

100 In patients with bicuspid aortic valve and dilated proximal ascending aor

101 n reducing the growth of aortic diameters in bicuspid aortic valve and if it slows the progression of

102 One had baseline bicuspid aortic valve and mild aortic regurgitation that

103 In the community, asymptomatic patients with bicuspid aortic valve and no or minimal hemodynamic abno

104 zygous Mib1 Cep192 Tmx3;Bcl7a mice developed bicuspid aortic valve and other valve-associated defects

105 ient-specific computer simulation of TAVR in bicuspid aortic valve and to determine whether patient-s

106 Making the decision regarding the timing of bicuspid aortic valve aneurysm surgery even more difficu

107 n the physiopathologic processes involved in bicuspid aortic valve aortopathy.

108 ding thoracic aortic aneurysm resection with bicuspid aortic valve aortopathy.

109 Severe calcification of a congenital bicuspid aortic valve continues to be an important cause

110 rtic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new

111 rtic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new

112 ng aortic aneurysm surgery in the setting of bicuspid aortic valve disease is complex, with multiple

113 oracic aortopathy after AVR in patients with bicuspid aortic valve disease is substantially different

114 aortic disease such as the Marfan syndrome, bicuspid aortic valve disease, and hereditary aortic ane

115 h aortic regurgitation, and in patients with bicuspid aortic valve disease.

116 uses underdeveloped aortic root leading to a bicuspid aortic valve due to the absence of non-coronary

117 Because we have previously found that bicuspid aortic valve experience greater stretch, we inv

118 ndocardial genes whose inactivation leads to bicuspid aortic valve formation and calcific aortic valv

119 e heterozygous MIB1 missense allele leads to bicuspid aortic valve in a NOTCH-sensitized genetic back

120 lities, including Marfan's syndrome in four, bicuspid aortic valve in four, and aortitis in one.

121 co-segregating with tetralogy of Fallot and bicuspid aortic valve in maternal relatives (p.Tyr2819Te

122 shared genetic substrate underlying LVNC and bicuspid aortic valve in which MIB1-NOTCH variants plays

123 Bicuspid aortic valve is frequent and is reported to cau

124 Bicuspid aortic valve is frequently an antecedent to aor

125 1,000 live births if the potentially serious bicuspid aortic valve is included), and of all forms inc

126 Bicuspid aortic valve is the most common congenital hear

127 Bicuspid aortic valve is the most common type of cardiac

128 ient-specific computer simulation of TAVR in bicuspid aortic valve may predict the development of imp

129 Bicuspid aortic valve occurs in 1% of the population, ma

130 In addition, bicuspid aortic valve occurs in more than one-half of th

131 METHODS AND We studied 969 consecutive bicuspid aortic valve patients (50+/-13 years; 87% men)

132 retrospective study was performed on TAVR in bicuspid aortic valve patients that had both pre- and po

133 In bicuspid aortic valve patients with dilated proximal asc

134 survival both for tricuspid aortic valve and bicuspid aortic valve patients, with the latter being si

135 urther obstructs left ventricular outflow in bicuspid aortic valve patients.

136 with age, and it is often associated with a bicuspid aortic valve present in 1-2% of the population.

137 placement in low-surgical risk patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis achieved favorable 30-day

138 Eligible patients had severe bicuspid aortic valve stenosis and met American Heart As

139 replacement (TAVR) in low-risk patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis have not been studied in

140 (Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis Transcatheter Aortic Valv

141 s self-expandable valve for the treatment of bicuspid aortic valve stenosis) registry included 353 co

142 The use of TAVI in severe bicuspid aortic valve stenosis, asymptomatic severe aort

143 rates of Marfan syndrome and lower rates of bicuspid aortic valve than those undergoing bio-CVG or m

144 Bicuspid aortic valve was associated with more intense h

145 County, Minn (age, 32+/-20 years; 65% male), bicuspid aortic valve was diagnosed between 1980 and 199

146 Bicuspid aortic valve was diagnosed in 227 patients (73.

147 During cardiac surgery, a congenital bicuspid aortic valve was found to be the predisposing f

148 Follow-up care for patients with bicuspid aortic valve was highly variable, and surveilla

149 Bicuspid aortic valve was identified in 74 individuals (

150 ortic aneurysms variably associated with the bicuspid aortic valve was used for identification of add

151 r malformation (i.e., bicuspid aortic valve, bicuspid aortic valve with coarctation of the aorta, or

152 ve since expanded the eligible population to bicuspid aortic valve with feasible anatomy; small aorti

153 Among patients with bicuspid aortic valve without severe valvular dysfunctio

154 tic valve, partially fused aortic valve, and bicuspid aortic valve+unicuspid aortic valve, respective

155 ); partially fused aortic valve, 12% (n=25); bicuspid aortic valve, 23% (n=47); and unicuspid aortic

156 xcluding individuals with Marfan syndrome or bicuspid aortic valve, a family history of AD was associ

157 ers, and congenital heart disease, including bicuspid aortic valve, among others.

158 ar septal defects, patent ductus arteriosus, bicuspid aortic valve, and coarctation of the aorta as w

159 ts were more likely to have Marfan syndrome, bicuspid aortic valve, and prior aortic surgery (all, p

160 ch1, or RBPJ displayed enlarged valve cusps, bicuspid aortic valve, and septal defects, indicating th

161 rbidities, including prevalent hypertension, bicuspid aortic valve, and the Marfan syndrome.

162 Partially fused aortic valve, bicuspid aortic valve, and unicuspid aortic valve were s

163 idney and cardiovascular malformation (i.e., bicuspid aortic valve, bicuspid aortic valve with coarct

164 s, left ventricular noncompaction (LVNC) and bicuspid aortic valve, can be caused by a set of inherit

165 fibrillation, and had a higher prevalence of bicuspid aortic valve, diabetes, and peripheral vascular

166 t to abnormalities (such as Marfan syndrome, bicuspid aortic valve, inflammatory vasculitis, atherosc

167 similar to the pattern seen in nonsyndromic bicuspid aortic valve, is equally prevalent (20-30%) in

168 ricle, aberrant semilunar valve development, bicuspid aortic valve, ventricular septal defects, and e

169 Bicuspid aortic valve, whereby the aortic valve forms wi

170 rm and ectoderm caused glandular defects and bicuspid aortic valve, which indicates that the FGF8 end

171 ociated cardiac malformation that included a bicuspid aortic valve.

172 eneration Evolut R/PRO or Sapien 3 valves in bicuspid aortic valve.

173 ne had truncus arteriosus, and another had a bicuspid aortic valve.

174 women, 161 (46%) had either a unicuspid or a bicuspid aortic valve.

175 ying aortic valve abnormalities as seen with bicuspid aortic valve.

176 center, 245 patients were identified to have bicuspid aortic valve.

177 on are common complications in patients with bicuspid aortic valve.

178 cardiovascular specialist after diagnosis of bicuspid aortic valve.

179 lterations from 4D flow MRI in patients with bicuspid aortic valve.

180 ing may improve clinical outcomes of TAVR in bicuspid aortic valve.

181 hymal transition, and NOTCH1 mutations cause bicuspid aortic valve; however, the temporal requirement

182 ression) and, as a clinical correlate, human bicuspid aortic valves (63% reduction).

183 tion in the ascending aorta in patients with bicuspid aortic valves (BAV) have influenced strategies

184 r transcatheter aortic valve implantation in bicuspid aortic valves (BAV) remains controversial.

185 ic aortic aneurysms (ATAAs) in patients with bicuspid aortic valves (BAV) versus patients with tricus

186 Bicuspid aortic valves (BAVs) are associated with premat

187 Explanted, stenotic bicuspid aortic valves (BAVs) from pediatric patients we

188 first-degree relatives (FDR) of people with bicuspid aortic valves (BAVs).

189 tricuspid aortic valves (n = 27), calcified bicuspid aortic valves (n = 23), and control tissue from

190 Patients with bicuspid aortic valves also showed significantly increas

191 s imply higher energy losses associated with bicuspid aortic valves and dilated ascending aortic geom

192 e risk of aortic dissection in patients with bicuspid aortic valves and severe aortic enlargement: th

193 Bicuspid aortic valves are associated with valve dysfunc

194 Bicuspid aortic valves calcify at a significantly higher

195 ith Marfan syndrome compared with those with bicuspid aortic valves confirm that operative management

196 Bicuspid aortic valves present distinct anatomical and p

197 m that operative management of patients with bicuspid aortic valves should not be extrapolated from M

198 neurysmal progression in Npr2(+/-) mice with bicuspid aortic valves than those with tricuspid valves.

199 Furthermore, pediatric stenotic bicuspid aortic valves that have lost normal extracellul

200 Incompetent bicuspid aortic valves with dilated aortic annuli are al

201 Bicuspid aortic valves with raphe had a significantly hi

202 ith Loeys-Dietz syndrome, 2 women (10%) with bicuspid aortic valves, 2 women (10%) with a family hist

203 rison, outcomes of 13,205 adults (2,079 with bicuspid aortic valves, 73 with Marfan syndrome, and 11,

204 isk factors for dissection: Marfan syndrome, bicuspid aortic valves, and larger aortic dimensions.

205 paroxysmal, persistent, or chronic AF, with bicuspid aortic valves, and patients who died within 48

206 n criteria were connective tissue disorders, bicuspid aortic valves, and survivors of a prior AAE.

207 In patients with bicuspid aortic valves, guidelines call for regular foll

208 addition, another 20/1,000 live births have bicuspid aortic valves, isolated anomalous lobar pulmona

209 iseases, including calcific aortic stenosis, bicuspid aortic valves, mitral valve prolapse, and rheum

210 of mice heterozygous for Npr2 had congenital bicuspid aortic valves, with worse aortic valve function

211 ng aorta with ventricular septal defect, and bicuspid aortic valves.

212 the development of atrial septal defects and bicuspid aortic valves.

213 ysms (maximal diameter > 4.0 cm), and 10 had bicuspid aortic valves.

214 yzed by microscopy to identify tricuspid and bicuspid aortic valves.

215 stify surgical intervention in patients with bicuspid aortic valves.

216 athogenetically and prognostically linked to bicuspid aortopathy.

217 eived in both maxillary and mandibular molar-bicuspid areas LDS or BGP on one side and non-anesthetic

218 ectiveness of LDS directly with BGP in molar-bicuspid areas of both arches.

219 0.5-2.3) and 14.3% and 3.9% in patients with bicuspid AS (HR 3.8; 95% CI, 0.8-18.5) treated with TAVI

220 aortic valve implantation outcomes in young bicuspid AS patients warrant caution and should be furth

221 A total of 100 patients had bicuspid AS.

222 arization with aortic valve replacement, and bicuspid AS.

223 5 years of age, including both tricuspid and bicuspid AS.

224 ere aortic insufficiency among patients with bicuspid AV (2.7% versus 2.1%; P<0.001).

225 a viable treatment option for patients with bicuspid AV disease.

226 aluate the outcomes of TAVR in patients with bicuspid AV stenosis in comparison with those with tricu

227 , 0.78-0.99]) was observed for patients with bicuspid AV versus patients with tricuspid AV in the Med

228 outcomes were comparable following TAVR for bicuspid AV versus tricuspid AV disease.

229 atients with tricuspid valves, patients with bicuspid AV were younger and had a lower Society of Thor

230 ion devices were used to treat patients with bicuspid AV, device success increased (93.5 versus 96.3;

231 dures (3.2%) were performed in patients with bicuspid AV, including 3705 with current-generation devi

232 cardiac remodeling between patients who have bicuspid (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) with sev

233 were mainly seen around maxillary molars and bicuspids, especially in males, while lippings were seen

234 e extraction socket) of the maxillary teeth (bicuspids forward) immediately following tooth extractio

235 Within the bicuspid group, multivariate analysis demonstrated that

236 unicommissural in 42; acommissural in 4] and bicuspid in 458); 417 (45%) had tricuspid valves (either

237 The aortic valve was bicuspid in 74 of 250 (30%) adequately imaged subjects.

238 lve was congenitally malformed (unicuspid or bicuspid) in 58 (98%) of the 59 AS patients, and in 38 (

239 challenging anatomies (eg, hostile calcium, bicuspid), it is important to know the potential advanta

240 fication and fibrosis of either a congenital bicuspid or a normal trileaflet aortic valve.

241 The morphology of the bicuspid or bicommissural aortic valve (BAV) may predict

242 nd was low overall, although patients with a bicuspid or regurgitant aortic valve, nontransfemoral ac

243 ie, severe versus nonsevere) or subtype (eg, bicuspid or rheumatic AS), and were insensitive and nons

244 did not affect survival, but patients with a bicuspid or unicuspid valve required operative intervent

245 We aimed to assess redo-TAVR feasibility in bicuspid patients and develop a predictive virtual valve

246 We studied computed tomography scans of bicuspid patients who received a balloon-expandable tran

247 frame height and valve shifting is common in bicuspid patients; a virtual planning algorithm accounti

248 A subgroup analysis of younger patients with bicuspid sAS showed a similar pattern of significantly l

249 ce of a control group treated surgically for bicuspid stenosis, randomized trials are needed to adequ

250 IGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Low Risk Bicuspid Study is a prospective, single-arm trial study

251 l/lingual sites, higher proportions of lower bicuspid teeth demonstrated attachment loss compared wit

252 ntributed subgingival samples from molar and bicuspid teeth presenting interproximal periodontitis le

253 interproximal attachment loss, whereas lower bicuspid teeth were at risk for gingival recession on bu

254 adavers were edentulous distal to the second bicuspid teeth, and 14 out of 20 were edentulous distal

255 PVR with a man-made polytetrafluoroethylene bicuspid valve and percutaneous PVR.

256 ion of clonal expansions in the much younger bicuspid valve CAS cases.

257 Techniques for repairing a bicuspid valve might vary depending on the different val

258 estimation of aortic dissection incidence in bicuspid valve patients irrespective of diagnosis status

259 alva, congenital aortic valve stenosis (with bicuspid valve) and myocarditis.

260 t substantially enriched for the presence of bicuspid valve, aortic enlargement, or both.

261 been described for a subset of cases with a bicuspid valve, data are limited on the overall familial

262 R was defined as TAVR in patients with known bicuspid valve, moderate aortic stenosis, severe mitral

263 root and are equally valid for tricuspid or bicuspid valve.

264 63 +/- 11 years, 73% were male, and 38% had bicuspid valve.

265 4 men, 343 (59%) had either a unicuspid or a bicuspid valve; of the 348 women, 161 (46%) had either a

266 rome (5.5 +/- 2.7%) compared with those with bicuspid valves (0.55 +/- 0.21%) and control group patie

267 s significantly lower for flat versus doming bicuspid valves (0.73 +/- 0.14 vs. 0.94 +/- 0.14, p < 0.

268 -up (10.4 +/- 4.3%) compared with those with bicuspid valves (2.5 +/- 0.6%) and control group patient

269 ome (10.8 +/- 4.4%) compared with those with bicuspid valves (4.8 +/- 0.8%) and control group patient

270 ficantly >0 in 21 patients and was lower for bicuspid valves (slope 0.21 cm2/100 ml per s) than for t

271 eas less flow dependence was associated with bicuspid valves and the features of rheumatic disease.

272 d for aortic complications of patients whose bicuspid valves had gone undiagnosed.

273 The results of this study demonstrate that bicuspid valves induced significantly altered ascending

274 search for aortic dissections in undiagnosed bicuspid valves revealed 2 additional patients, allowing

275 Time-resolved (cine) 2D images of the bicuspid valves were coregistered with 4D flow data, dir

276 tive endocarditis, 46 patients (38%; 15 with bicuspid valves); probable rheumatic heart disease, 8 pa

277 ents, in 20 (53%) of the 38 AR patients with bicuspid valves, and in all 12 AR patients with tricuspi

278 but interest is increasing, particularly for bicuspid valves.

279 intravascular 3D fluid mixers and functional bicuspid valves.

280 cuspid (versus tricuspid) AV group (96.3% in bicuspid versus 97.4% in tricuspid, P=0.07), with a slig

281 jor bleeding) according to valve morphology (bicuspid versus tricuspid).

282 es, device success was slightly lower in the bicuspid (versus tricuspid) AV group (96.3% in bicuspid

283 A bicuspid virtual planning algorithm accounting for 83.4%

284 day stroke rate was significantly higher for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis (2.5% vs 1.6%; HR,

285 VR for aortic stenosis, patients treated for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis had no significant

286 placement for aortic stenosis, patients with bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis had no significant

287 TAVR for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis.

288 eart surgery was significantly higher in the bicuspid vs tricuspid cohort (0.9% vs 0.4%, respectively

289 the mandibular cuspids and first and second bicuspids was 275.88 mm2, 251.45 mm2, and 271.81 mm2, re

290 -sided measurements for the mandibular first bicuspid were 252.55 mm2 and 247.02 mm2, respectively (P

291 of severe aortic stenosis (6 tricuspid and 2 bicuspid) were created using dual-material fused 3D prin

292 he frequent (75%) absence of maxillary first bicuspids, while the most distinguishing feature of PAX9