You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Correspondence
The Authors' reply
  1. Christopher R Burke1,
  2. Joseph Bavaria2
  1. 1 Cardiac Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
  2. 2 Cardiac Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Christopher R Burke, Cardiac Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA; cburke22{at}uw.edu

https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2021-320557

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    The Authors’ reply

    In response to a recent editorial pertaining to the personalized external aortic support (PEARS) procedure,1 Robert Anderson presents an important anatomical detail, pointing out the difference between the ventriculo-aortic junction with the virtual basal ring. As he describes, precise definitions of these differing anatomical definitions and landmarks is critical to accurately discuss potential limitations of annular stabilisation in reference to aortic valve repair. However, we prefer to use a more clinically and surgically oriented definition of the ‘aortic annulus’ as presented by Youseffi et al, whereas the aortic annulus is defined as the plane passing through the nadir of the aortic valve cusps (similar to the virtual basal ring).2 We similarly agree with Youseffi et al that in the vast majority of cases, …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Twitter @chrisryanburke

    • Contributors Both authors contributed to conceptual design and writing of the manuscript.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles