Background Surgical repair of the mitral valve has long been the established therapy for degenerative mitral regurgitation (MR). Newer transcatheter methods over the last decade, such as the MitraClip, serve to restore mitral function with reduced procedural burden and enhanced recovery. This study aims to compare the shortterm and midterm outcomes of MitraClip insertion with surgical repair for MR. Methods A systematic review of the literature was conducted for studies comparing outcomes between surgical repair and MitraClip. The initial search returned 1850 titles, from which 12 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria (one randomized controlled trial and 11 retrospective studies). Results The final analysis comprised 4219 patients (MitraClip 1210; surgery 3009). Operative mortality was not different between the groups (odds ratio [OR] = 1.63, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.63−4.23]; p = .317). Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the MitraClip group (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.882, 95% CI: [0.77–0.99]; p < .001) with considerable heterogeneity (I2 > 90%; p < .001). The rate of reoperation on the mitral valve was lower in the surgical group (OR = 0.392; 95% CI: [0.188−0.817]; p = .012) as was the rate of MR recurrence grade moderate or above (OR = 0.29; 95% CI: [0.19−0.46]; p < .001) during midterm follow up. Long term survival (4–5 years) was also similar between both groups (hazard ratio = 0.70; 95% CI: [0.35−1.41]; p = .323). Conclusions This study highlights the superior midterm durability of surgical valve repair for MR compared with the MitraClip.
PBS analysis can provide a simple method of rapidly diagnosing pulmonary tuberculosis. In this cohort, M. tuberculosis culture yield was increased by 7% through PBS sampling. This study has important infection control implications with nearly one third of patients becoming more infectious after bronchoscopy.
Introduction: Cor-Knot automated fastener has been used as an adjunct in heart valve surgery to eliminate the need for manual tying during valve implantation. Although reduced operative time and facilitation for minimally invasive surgery are clear benefits, whether their use translates to improved patient outcome remains debatable. This study aims to review the safety and efficacy of automated fasteners in heart valve surgeries. Method: Specific searches were conducted via online medical databases (Pubmed, Embase, Ovid) between 1950 and June 2019. Longitudinal studies were included that provided operative parameters. Results: The initial literature search identified 3773 articles, but only eight met the inclusion criteria and were used for analysis: four studies related to aortic valve replacement (AVR), four related to mitral valve (MV) intervention (total n = 810). The meta-analysis revealed the significantly shorter aortic cross-clamp time in the Cor-knot group compared to manual tying, both in AVR and MV surgeries (P < .05). Cardiopulmonary bypass time was significantly shorter in the Cor-knot group when analyzing studies in MV surgery (weighted mean difference [WMD]: 110.0; 95% confidence interval: 12.3-207.7; P = .027) The use of Cor-Knot did not increase the risk of permanent pacemaker implantation, paravalvular leak, and 30-day mortality. The majority of studies reported no change in the length of intensive unit care and total hospital stay. Conclusion:We confirmed that the majority of existing literatures indicated the safety and intraoperative efficacy with automated fastener application. Nevertheless, there is currently no evidence to support automated fastened sutures can translate its intraoperative advantages to improved patient outcome. K E Y W O R D S aortic, automated fastener, clinical review, cor-knot, heart valves, mitral 1 | BACKGROUND Surgery for valvular heart disease is well-established and remains a superior treatment option for many valvular pathologies in many patient groups. Both replacement (with prosthetic valves) and repair Abbreviations: AS, aortic stenosis; AVR, aortic valve replacement; AXT, aortic cross-clamp time; CPB, cardiopulmonary bypass time; ICU, intensive care unit; LV, left ventricular; Mini-AVR, minimally invasive aortic valve replacement; Mini-MV repair, minimally invasive mitral valve repair; MR, mitral regurgitation; MV, mitral valve; PPI, permanent pacemaker implantation; PVL, paravalvular leak; TAVR, transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Lueh Chien and M. Yousuf Salmasi are Joint first authors.
Acute aortic syndrome and in particular aortic dissection (AAD) persists as a cause of significant morbidity and mortality despite improvements in surgical management. This clinical review aims to explore the risks of misdiagnosis, outcomes associated with misdiagnosis and evaluate current diagnostic methods for reducing its incidence.Due to the nature of the pathology, misdiagnosing the condition and delaying management can dramatically worsen patient outcomes. Several diagnostic challenges exist, including low prevalence, rapidly propagating pathology, non-discrete symptomatology, non-specific signs, analogy with other acute conditions and lack of management infrastructure. A similarity to acute coronary syndromes is a specific concern and risks patient maltreatment. AAD with malperfusion syndromes are both a cause of misdiagnosis and marker of disease complication, requiring specifically tailored management plans from the emergency setting.Despite improvements in diagnostic measures, including imaging modalities and biomarkers, misdiagnosis of AAD remains commonplace and current guidelines are relatively limited in preventing its occurrence. This paper recommends the early use of AAD risk scoring, focused echocardiography and most importantly, fast-tracking patients to cross-sectional imaging where the suspicion of AAD is high. This has the potential to improve the diagnostic process for AAD and limit the risk of misdiagnosis. However, our understanding remains limited by the lack of large patient datasets and an adequately audited processes of emergency department practice.
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.