This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Medicine: Cardiology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Cardiology task force (assessed as Mid-importance). Anatomy: Gross Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been classified as relating to gross anatomy.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Bicuspid aortic valve. PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles) The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine. Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

I was told by a doctor that this created a higher risk for heart disease and the best way to prevent that was with antibiotics. Any thoughts?Rion2032 (talk) 07:25, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bicuspid aortic valves cannot be prevented in most cases. They are typically a congenital condition. Some rheumatoid conditions may result in fusion of two cusps however, this is not a pure BAV. What your doctor was likely referring to was that patients with BAV are at a higher risk for a condition known as infective endocarditis. Many individuals with BAV are required to to take large doses of antibiotics prior to any dental work in order to avoid this condition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cardiokate (talk • contribs) 20:42, 12 October 2011 (UTC) No, antibiotoic prophylaxis in minor dental procedures is not mandatory for bicuspid aortic valves, symptoms may come from regurgitation, atypical chest pain, dypnea; or from stenosis, it is the aorta dilatation and some markers, as BNP, what makes considering surgery, only correction for this disease, it is a genetical disorder, as indicated, from alterations in NOTCH pathway. First grade relatives of cases better have an US heart examination. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.39.98.104 (talk) 20:18, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tricuspid aortic valve is a normal aortic valve that has three cusps. A bicuspid aortic valve (i.e. having only two cusps) is mostly due to congenital malformation.

Huh? This can't be right. I know nada about anatomy, but something's being repeated that shouldn't be. grendel|khan 20:42, 2004 Dec 27 (UTC)

What is wrong here? Tri = 3 cusps, bi = two cusps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.203.126.88 (talk) 21:42, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should we mention Arnold_Schwarzenegger? He had this disease.

It is not a disease. If there is a good source, then perhaps he may need to be mentioned. JFW | T@lk 19:26, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PMID 18799444 is a very thorough Canadian study that finds predictors for the progression to aortic stenosis or regurgitation. JFW | T@lk 19:26, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The claims in this article that are the most alarming if you have this condition are the very ones that do not have any citations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.76.113.2 (talk) 13:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am a member of WikiProject Anatomy, a Wikipedia wide project that maintains and improves articles that fall under the scope of anatomy. Since your article has fallen under our scope, I have placed the correct templates on this talk page for verification. Upon review of this article, I'd like to make a few points, as shown:

• Assess articles with class and importance factors

I'm glad this article could fall within our scope, and I hope to see it grow large! Many thanks! Renaissancee (talk) 03:35, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the summary at the end is enough for a prognosis section the other statement was confusing Ruffruder0 (talk) 08:09, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2016.03.009 JFW | T@lk 23:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Bicuspid aortic valve abnormality is seen in 1 to 2 percent of all live births Notch signalling pathway."

Am I drunk or is this sentence completely nonsensical

No, you're not drunk. The Notch signaling pathway bit was leftover from another sentence that appears to have been removed. I have fixed it. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 19:56, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The source used in the epidemiology section is from 2008. I tried finding sources published on or after 2020 about sex differences, which all claim a different ratio (thrice as common). Should that sentence be removed and information from these articles be added, some of it in a new section on gender differences? These are the articles I came across: [1]Sex and Gender Differences in Aortic Disease, [2]Sex differences in bicuspid aortic valve disease, [3]Sex Differences in Children and Young Adults With Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease in First Two Decades of Life. Laurentian388 (talk) 01:43, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]