Cardiovascular revascularization medicine : including molecular interventions · 2020
Outcomes of Percutaneous Mitral Valve Repair in Systolic Versus Diastolic Congestive Heart Failure.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Allaham Haytham, Omran Jad, Burstein Steven, Gifft Kristina, Ghrair Fadi, Davis Ian, Chahal Diljon, Enezate Tariq
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous mitral valve repair with MitraClip device has been approved for treatment of mitral regurgitation in symptomatic patients deemed high risk for surgical repair. This study compares outcomes of Mitraclip in patients with systolic (SHF) versus diastolic heart failure (DHF).
METHODS: The study population was extracted from the 2016 Nationwide Readmissions Data (NRD) using International Classification of Diseases, tenth edition, clinical modifications/procedure coding system (ICD-9-CM/PCS) codes for the Mitraclip, SHF, DHF, and procedural complications. Study endpoints included in-hospital all-cause mortality, cardiogenic shock, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), acute kidney injury (AKI), stroke, acute respiratory failure, bleeding, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay (LOS) as well as 30-day readmission rate.
RESULTS: A total of 1681 discharges that had Mitraclip during the index hospitalization and had a history of SHF (909) or DHF (772) were included in this analysis. The mean age was 78.5 years and 46.6% were female. SHF group was associated with higher post-procedural cardiogenic shock (7.3% versus 2.0%, p < 0.01), AMI (2.1% versus 0.8%, p = 0.03), AKI (21.0 versus 14.2%, p < 0.01), acute respiratory failure (13.2% versus 9.6%, p = 0.02), and longer LOS (9.6 versus 5.7 days, p < 0.01). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of in-hospital all-cause mortality (3.4% versus 2.3%, p = 0.18), stroke (0.7% versus 1.4%, p = 0.15), bleeding (10.7% versus 8.9%, p = 0.23), need for blood transfusion (5.7% versus 3.6%, p = 0.05), or 30-day readmission rate (15.7% versus 16.1%, p = 0.86).
CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to DHF, patients with SHF undergoing the MitraClip had higher in-hospital morbidities and longer LOS but comparable mortality and 30-day readmission rates.
METHODS: The study population was extracted from the 2016 Nationwide Readmissions Data (NRD) using International Classification of Diseases, tenth edition, clinical modifications/procedure coding system (ICD-9-CM/PCS) codes for the Mitraclip, SHF, DHF, and procedural complications. Study endpoints included in-hospital all-cause mortality, cardiogenic shock, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), acute kidney injury (AKI), stroke, acute respiratory failure, bleeding, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay (LOS) as well as 30-day readmission rate.
RESULTS: A total of 1681 discharges that had Mitraclip during the index hospitalization and had a history of SHF (909) or DHF (772) were included in this analysis. The mean age was 78.5 years and 46.6% were female. SHF group was associated with higher post-procedural cardiogenic shock (7.3% versus 2.0%, p < 0.01), AMI (2.1% versus 0.8%, p = 0.03), AKI (21.0 versus 14.2%, p < 0.01), acute respiratory failure (13.2% versus 9.6%, p = 0.02), and longer LOS (9.6 versus 5.7 days, p < 0.01). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of in-hospital all-cause mortality (3.4% versus 2.3%, p = 0.18), stroke (0.7% versus 1.4%, p = 0.15), bleeding (10.7% versus 8.9%, p = 0.23), need for blood transfusion (5.7% versus 3.6%, p = 0.05), or 30-day readmission rate (15.7% versus 16.1%, p = 0.86).
CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to DHF, patients with SHF undergoing the MitraClip had higher in-hospital morbidities and longer LOS but comparable mortality and 30-day readmission rates.