Title Page
Abstract
Contents
Introduction 8
Methods 8
Results 10
Discussion 12
Limitations 13
Conclusions 13
Funding 14
Compliance with Ethical Standards 14
References 15
Korean abstracts (국문요약) 27
Table 1. Baseline characteristics of the patients 17
Table 2. Operative profiles 18
Table 3. Surgical outcomes 19
Table 4. Comparison of intraoperative and computed tomographic measurement (A) tricuspid and (B) bicuspid 20
Table 5. Measurement reliability of aortic cups (A) tricuspid and (B) bicuspid 21
Figure 1. Flow diagram describing the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study cohort 22
Figure 2. Measurement of the (A) free margin length and (B) geometric height on computed tomography 23
Figure 3. Intraoperative image illustrating (A) free margin length and (B) geometric height measurement 24
Figure 4. Agreement between the intraoperative and computed tomography free margin length measurements of the tricuspid aortic valve (A) left, (B) right, and (C) noncoronary cusp (Bland-Altman plots). 25
Figure 5. Agreement between the intraoperative and computed tomography geometric height measurements of the tricuspid aortic valve (A) left, (B) right, and (C) noncoronary cusp (Bland-Altman plots). 25
Figure 6. Agreement between intraoperative and computed tomography free margin length measurements of the bicuspid aortic valve (A) non-fused and (B) fused cusp (Bland-Altman plots). 26
Figure 7. Agreement between intraoperative and computed tomography geometric height measurements of the bicuspid aortic valve (A) non-fused and (B) fused cusp (Bland-Altman plots). 26