Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2021
Comparison of Transcatheter and Open Mitral Valve Repair Among Patients With Mitral Regurgitation.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Kay Bradley, Chouairi Fouad, Clark Katherine A A, Reinhardt Samuel W, Fuery Michael, Guha Avirup, Ahmad Tariq, Kaple Ryan K, Desai Nihar R
Аннотация
In 2013, the Food and Drug Administration approved the first transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) device for degenerative mitral regurgitation for patients at prohibitive surgical risk. To better understand contemporary utilization trends and outcomes, we reviewed hospitalizations, identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes, in which the patient underwent TMVr or mitral valve repair (MVr) with a diagnosis of mitral regurgitation, without stenosis, from the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample from 2014 to 2017. We included 10,020 hospitalizations in which the patient underwent TMVr and 5845 in which the patient underwent MVr and assessed trends in demographic characteristics, patient comorbidities, total hospital charges, and outcomes. Transcatheter mitral valve repair experienced exponential growth, increasing from 150 to 5115 over the study period (P<.001 for trend), whereas MVr grew to a lesser degree. The median length of stay for TMVr decreased from 4 to 2 days; mortality declined from 3.3% to 1.6% (P<.001 for both). Both TMVr and MVr rates of discharge home increased over the study period. Total charges for TMVr increased from $149,582 to $178,109, whereas those for MVr increased to a lesser degree, from $149,426 to $157,146 (P<.001 for both). Discharge disposition, length of stay, and in-hospital mortality all exhibited favorable trends for both procedures. Caution must be exercised in direct comparisons between procedures as they target somewhat different populations. With expanded indications for TMVr, we anticipate further increases in procedural volume, although the effect on MVr remains unclear.