Journal of cardiac surgery · 2022
Institution representation in publications reporting mitral valve repair durability: A scoping review.
СтатьяScoping ReviewНазвание 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.
Komlo Caroline M, Brooks Cornell, Amabile Andrea, Mori Makoto, Najem Michael, Mullan Clancy, Weininger Gabe, Krane Markus, Vallabhajosyula Prashanth, Geirsson Arnar
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Mitral valve repair durability currently plays a key role in operative decision making and in defining optimal surgical practice. However, mitral valve durability outcomes measures are not captured by national registries and limited to centers that publish their outcomes. In this study, we aim to describe the scope of institutions represented by reports describing durability outcomes after mitral valve repair within the contemporary literature.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A scoping review of the literature was performed to extract abstracts potentially reporting mitral valve operation outcomes published between 2000-2019. 370 full text articles reporting mitral valve durability outcomes by either reoperation rate or rate of recurrent mitral regurgitation met criteria for analysis. Study characteristics including case volume, country and institution of origin, and surgeon volume were extracted and used to calculate the proportion of total cases in the top 3, 5, and 10 represented countries and institutions by the sum of reported mitral valve repairs described. The top 5 of 21 countries represented 78.9% of the mitral valve repair cases described. The top 3 most represented institutions described 20,120 (37.3%) of all mitral valve repairs in 58 (33.9%) single-center studies.
CONCLUSION: Published mitral valve repair durability data must be interpreted with caution when used to derive policies and practice recommendations that govern the cardiovascular community at large.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A scoping review of the literature was performed to extract abstracts potentially reporting mitral valve operation outcomes published between 2000-2019. 370 full text articles reporting mitral valve durability outcomes by either reoperation rate or rate of recurrent mitral regurgitation met criteria for analysis. Study characteristics including case volume, country and institution of origin, and surgeon volume were extracted and used to calculate the proportion of total cases in the top 3, 5, and 10 represented countries and institutions by the sum of reported mitral valve repairs described. The top 5 of 21 countries represented 78.9% of the mitral valve repair cases described. The top 3 most represented institutions described 20,120 (37.3%) of all mitral valve repairs in 58 (33.9%) single-center studies.
CONCLUSION: Published mitral valve repair durability data must be interpreted with caution when used to derive policies and practice recommendations that govern the cardiovascular community at large.