Isolated TV surgery is rarely performed, although utilization has increased over time. However, despite an increase in surgical volume, operative mortality has not changed. Mortality is greatest in patients undergoing valve replacement. Given the increasing prevalence of isolated TV disease in the population, research into optimal surgical timing and patient selection is critical.
BackgroundStudies assessing the differential impact of sex on outcomes of aortic valve replacement (AVR) yielded conflicting results. We sought to investigate sex‐related differences in AVR utilization, patient risk profile, and in‐hospital outcomes using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.Methods and ResultsIn total, 166 809 patients (63% male and 37% female) who underwent AVR between 2003 and 2014 were identified, and 48.5% had a concomitant cardiac surgery procedure. Compared with men, women were older and had more nonatherosclerotic comorbid conditions including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, obstructive pulmonary disease, atrial fibrillation/flutter, and anemia but fewer incidences of coronary and peripheral arterial disease and prior sternotomies. In‐hospital mortality was significantly higher in women (5.6% versus 4%, P<0.001). Propensity matching was performed to assess the impact of sex on the outcomes of isolated AVR and yielded 28 237 matched pairs of male and female participants. In the propensity‐matched groups, in‐hospital mortality was higher in women (3.3% versus 2.9%, P<0.001). Along with vascular complications and blood transfusion (6% versus 5.6%, P=0.027 and 40.4% versus 33.9%, P<0.001, respectively). Rates of stroke, permanent pacemaker implantation, and acute kidney injury requiring dialysis were similar (2.4% versus 2.4%, P=0.99; 6% versus 6.3%, P=0.15; and 1.4% versus 1.3%, P=0.14, respectively). Length of stay median and interquartile range were both similar between groups (7±6 days). Rates of nonhome discharge were higher among women (27.9% versus 19.6%, P<0.001).ConclusionsWomen have worse in‐hospital mortality following AVR compared with men. Coupled with the accumulating evidence suggesting higher magnitude of benefit of transcatheter AVR over AVR in women, women should perhaps be offered transcatheter AVR over AVR at a lower threshold than men.
Isolated tricuspid regurgitation (TR) can be caused by primary valvular abnormalities such as flail leaflet or secondary annular dilation as is seen in atrial fibrillation, pulmonary hypertension and left heart disease. There is an increasing recognition of a subgroup of patients with isolated TR in the absence of other associated cardiac abnormalities. Left untreated isolated TR significantly worsens survival. Stand-alone surgery for isolated TR is rarely performed due to an average operative mortality of 8%–10% and a paucity of data demonstrating improved survival. When surgery is performed, valve repair may be preferred over replacement; however, there is a risk of significant recurrent regurgitation after repair. Existing society guidelines do not fully address the management of isolated TR. We propose that patients at low operative risk with symptomatic severe isolated TR and no reversible cause undergo surgery prior to the onset of right ventricular dysfunction and end-organ damage. For patients at increased surgical risk novel percutaneous interventions may offer an alternative treatment but further research is needed. Significant knowledge gaps remain and future research is needed to define operative outcomes and provide comparative data for medical and surgical therapy.
The role of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) in the treatment of acute proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is controversial, and the nationwide safety outcomes are unknown.OBJECTIVES The primary objective was to compare in-hospital outcomes of CDT plus anticoagulation with those of anticoagulation alone. The secondary objective was to evaluate the temporal trends in the utilization and outcomes of CDT in the treatment of proximal DVT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSObservational study of patients with a principal discharge diagnosis of proximal or caval DVT from 2005 to 2010 in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. We compared patients treated with CDT plus anticoagulation with the patients treated with anticoagulation alone. We used propensity scores to construct 2 matched groups of 3594 patients in each group for comparative outcomes analysis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary study outcome was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included bleeding complications, length of stay, and hospital charges.RESULTS Among a total of 90 618 patients hospitalized for DVT (national estimate of 449 200 hospitalizations), 3649 (4.1%) underwent CDT. The CDT utilization rates increased from 2.3% in 2005 to 5.9% in 2010. Based on the propensity-matched comparison, the in-hospital mortality was not significantly different between the CDT and the anticoagulation groups (1.2% vs 0.9%) (OR, 1.40 [95% CI, 0.88-2.25]) (P = .15). The rates of blood transfusion (11.1% vs 6.5%) (OR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.57-2.20]) (P < .001), pulmonary embolism (17.9% vs 11.4%) (OR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.49-1.94]) (P < .001), intracranial hemorrhage (0.9% vs 0.3%) (OR, 2.72 [95% CI, 1.40-5.30]) (P = .03), and vena cava filter placement (34.8% vs 15.6%) (OR, 2.89 [95% CI, 2.58-3.23]) (P < .001) were significantly higher in the CDT group. The CDT group had longer mean (SD) length of stay (7.2 [5.8] vs 5.0 [4.7] days) (OR, 2.27 [95% CI, 1.49-1.94])
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.