Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:08:57.463Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Severe bicuspid aortic stenosis in pregnancy: balancing the risk of prematurity and maternal mortality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

Chinedu Nwabuobi*
Affiliation:
Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
Megan McDowell
Affiliation:
Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
Sarah Običan
Affiliation:
Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
*
Author for correspondence: C. Nwabuobi, MD, MS, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, 2 Tampa General Circle, Suite 6053, Tampa, FL 33606, USA. Tel: 813 259 0828; Fax: 813 259 0839; E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

We report a case of combined severe aortic stenosis and regurgitation in a pregnant patient with a history of congenital bicuspid aortic valve. The patient presented at 22 weeks of gestation with angina and pre-syncopal symptoms. During her admission, she experienced intermittent episodes of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia and hypotension. A multi-disciplinary healthcare team was assembled to decide on the appropriate medical and surgical treatment options. At 28 weeks of gestation, the patient underwent a caesarean delivery immediately followed by a mechanical aortic valve replacement.

Type
Brief Report
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Silversides, CK, Colman, JM, Sermer, M, Farine, D, Siu, SC. Early and intermediate-term outcomes of pregnancy with congenital aortic stenosis. Am J Cardiol 2003; 91: 13861389.Google Scholar
2. Yap, SC, Drenthen, W, Pieper, PG, et al. Risk of complications during pregnancy in women with congenital aortic stenosis. Int J Cardiol 2008; 126: 240246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. McKellar, SH, MacDonald, RJ, Michelena, HI, Connolly, HM, Sundt, TM 3rd. Frequency of cardiovascular events in women with a congenitally bicuspid aortic valve in a single community and effect of pregnancy on events. Am J Cardiol 2011; 107: 9699.Google Scholar
4. Roberts, WC. The congenitally bicuspid aortic valve. A study of 85 autopsy cases. Am J Cardiol 1970; 26: 7283.Google Scholar
5. Fedak, PW, Verma, S, David, TE, Leask, RL, Weisel, RD, Butany, J. Clinical and pathophysiological implications of a bicuspid aortic valve. Circulation. 2002; 106: 900904.Google Scholar
6. Drenthen, W, Pieper, PG, Roos-Hesselink, JW, et al. Outcome of pregnancy in women with congenital heart disease: a literature review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49: 23032311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Hameed, A, Karaalp, IS, Tummala, PP, et al. The effect of valvular heart disease on maternal and fetal outcome of pregnancy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 37: 893899.Google Scholar
8. Nishimura, RA, Otto, CM, Bonow, RO, et al. AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 148: e1e132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. John, AS, Gurley, F, Schaff, HV, et al. Cardiopulmonary bypass during pregnancy. Ann Thorac Surg 2011; 91: 11911196.Google Scholar
10. Chambers, CE, Clark, SL. Cardiac surgery during pregnancy. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1994; 37: 316323.Google Scholar
11. Hodson, R, Kirker, E, Swanson, J, Walsh, C, Korngold, EC, Ramelli, S. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement during pregnancy. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2016; 9.Google Scholar