Cardiovascular revascularization medicine : including molecular interventions · 2023
Rural versus urban outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation: The importance of the heart team.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Fogelson Benjamin, Baljepally Raj, Heidel Eric, Ferlita Steve, Moodie Travis, Coombes Tyler, Goodwin Rachel P, Livesay James
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Rural patients face known healthcare disparities and worse cardiovascular outcomes compared to urban residents due to inequitable access and delayed care. Few studies have assessed rural-urban differences in outcomes following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI). We compared short-term post-TAVI outcomes between rural and urban patients.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of n = 413 patients who underwent TAVI at our large academic medical center, between 2011 and 2020 (rural/urban patients = 93/320. Rural/urban males = 53/173). Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality. Secondary outcomes included stroke/transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, acute kidney injury, bleeding, vascular complications, and length of stay.
RESULTS: The mean age in years was 77 [IQR 70-82] for rural patients and 78 [IQR 72-84] for urban patients. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, except for a greater frequency of active smokers and diabetics as well as a greater body mass index in the rural group. There were no statistically significant differences in all-cause or cardiovascular mortality between the groups. There was also no statistically significant difference in secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Rural and urban patients had no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality or cardiovascular mortality following TAVI. Given its minimally invasive nature and quality-centric, multidisciplinary care provided by the TAVI Heart Teams, TAVI may be the preferred modality for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis in rural populations.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of n = 413 patients who underwent TAVI at our large academic medical center, between 2011 and 2020 (rural/urban patients = 93/320. Rural/urban males = 53/173). Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality. Secondary outcomes included stroke/transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, acute kidney injury, bleeding, vascular complications, and length of stay.
RESULTS: The mean age in years was 77 [IQR 70-82] for rural patients and 78 [IQR 72-84] for urban patients. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, except for a greater frequency of active smokers and diabetics as well as a greater body mass index in the rural group. There were no statistically significant differences in all-cause or cardiovascular mortality between the groups. There was also no statistically significant difference in secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Rural and urban patients had no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality or cardiovascular mortality following TAVI. Given its minimally invasive nature and quality-centric, multidisciplinary care provided by the TAVI Heart Teams, TAVI may be the preferred modality for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis in rural populations.