Heart, lung & circulation · 2017
Early Outcomes After Mitral Valve Repair versus Replacement in the Elderly: A Propensity Matched Analysis.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Farid Shakil, Ladwiniec Andrew, Hernández-Sánchez Jules, Povey Hannah, Caruana Edward, Ali Ayyaz, Moorjani Narain, Irons Joanne, Ring Liam, Abu-Omar Yasir
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To compare early outcomes of mitral valve repair versus replacement in elderly patients with degenerative mitral valve disease.
METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected clinical data of patients over 75 years of age, who underwent mitral valve surgery for degenerative disease, between 2010 and 2013, was carried out. Those undergoing mitral valve repair and replacement were propensity matched to adjust for baseline clinical differences.
RESULTS: A total 260 patients were identified: mitral valve repair was undertaken in 145 and replacement in 115 patients. After propensity matching, 78 patients were included in each group. In the entire, unmatched population, in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in those undergoing replacement compared with those undergoing repair (9.6% vs 1.4%, p=0.003). In-hospital death occurred in six (7.7%) of the propensity matched replacement group and none in the repair group (p=0.012). Amongst the propensity matched groups, probability of survival at 1, 2 and 3 years were 0.94, 0.90 and 0.86 respectively for the repair group and 0.85, 0.77 and 0.69 for the replacement group: the HR for death between replacement and repair is 2.5 (1.2-5.4), p=0.012.
CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations imposed by retrospective analyses, our study demonstrates that, in elderly patients with degenerative disease of the mitral valve, repair is associated with improved short-term and mid-term outcomes compared with mitral valve replacement.
METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected clinical data of patients over 75 years of age, who underwent mitral valve surgery for degenerative disease, between 2010 and 2013, was carried out. Those undergoing mitral valve repair and replacement were propensity matched to adjust for baseline clinical differences.
RESULTS: A total 260 patients were identified: mitral valve repair was undertaken in 145 and replacement in 115 patients. After propensity matching, 78 patients were included in each group. In the entire, unmatched population, in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in those undergoing replacement compared with those undergoing repair (9.6% vs 1.4%, p=0.003). In-hospital death occurred in six (7.7%) of the propensity matched replacement group and none in the repair group (p=0.012). Amongst the propensity matched groups, probability of survival at 1, 2 and 3 years were 0.94, 0.90 and 0.86 respectively for the repair group and 0.85, 0.77 and 0.69 for the replacement group: the HR for death between replacement and repair is 2.5 (1.2-5.4), p=0.012.
CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations imposed by retrospective analyses, our study demonstrates that, in elderly patients with degenerative disease of the mitral valve, repair is associated with improved short-term and mid-term outcomes compared with mitral valve replacement.