To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mid-term outcome of aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic valve and tricuspid aortic valve and the related risk factors.
From January 2014 to June 2019, 177 tricuspid aortic valve patients and 101 bicuspid aortic valve patients who underwent aortic valve replacement in our hospital were collected. 1:1 propensity score matching analysis was used to control the bias in patient selection. The perioperative and follow-up data between the two groups were compared. Independent risk factors which were associated with the continued dilatation of the ascending aorta were identified by univariate or multivariate logistic regression analysis.
After the matching procedure, 160 patients were included in the analysis (80 in each group). Baseline characteristics, intraoperative, and perioperative outcomes were similar between the two groups (all p > 0.05). Moreover, 67 patients in the tricuspid aortic valve group and 70 in the bicuspid aortic valve group completed the follow-up. The ascending aorta change, annual change rate, and the proportion of continuous dilation of ascending aorta in bicuspid aortic valve group were significantly higher than those in the tricuspid aortic valve group (p < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that type 1 in bicuspid aortic valve (OR 5.173; 95% CI 1.772, 15.101; p = 0.003), aortic regurgitation (OR 3.673; 95% CI 1.133, 11.908; p = 0.030), and aortic valve stenosis with regurgitation (OR 6.489; 95% CI 1.726, 24.404; p = 0.006) were independent risk factors for the continued dilatation of the ascending aorta in all AV patients. Furthermore, the multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that type 1 in bicuspid aortic valve (OR 5.157; 95% CI 1.053, 25.272; p = 0.043), age ≥ 40 years (OR 6.956; 95% CI 1.228, 39.410; p = 0.028), and aortic regurgitation (OR 4.322; 95% CI 1.174, 15.911; p = 0.028) were independent risk factors for the continued dilatation of the ascending aorta in bicuspid aortic valve patients.
Compared with tricuspid aortic valve patients, the ascending aorta of bicuspid aortic valve patients is more likely to continue to enlarge after aortic valve replacement. Type 1 in bicuspid aortic valve, age ≥ 40 years, and aortic regurgitation were the independent risk factors.
The Weigl Colour-Form Sorting Test is a brief, widely used test of executive function. So far, it is unknown whether this test is specific to frontal lobe damage. Our aim was to investigate Weigl performance in patients with focal, unilateral, left or right, frontal, or non-frontal lesions.
We retrospectively analysed data from patients with focal, unilateral, left or right, frontal (n = 37), or non-frontal (n = 46) lesions who had completed the Weigl. Pass/failure (two correct solutions/less than two correct solutions) and errors were analysed.
A greater proportion of frontal patients failed the Weigl than non-frontal patients, which was highly significant (p < 0.001). In patients who failed the test, a significantly greater proportion of frontal patients provided the same solution twice. No significant differences in Weigl performance were found between patients with left versus right hemisphere lesions or left versus right frontal lesions. There was no significant correlation between performance on the Weigl and tests tapping fluid intelligence.
The Weigl is specific to frontal lobe lesions and not underpinned by fluid intelligence. Both pass/failure on this test and error types are informative. Hence, the Weigl is suitable for assessing frontal lobe dysfunction.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.