4.2 Article

National 10-year trends and outcomes of isolated and concomitant tricuspid valve surgery

期刊

JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY
卷 60, 期 1, 页码 119-127

出版社

EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
DOI: 10.23736/S0021-9509.18.10468-X

关键词

Tricuspid valve, surgery; Trends; Treatment outcome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: The data on the trends and comparative outcomes after isolated and concomitant tricuspid valve repair/replacement (TVR) is scarce. METHODS: The International Classification of Diseases - 9th version was used to identify the patients who underwent TVR, using the National Inpatient Sample. Outcomes were evaluated using the analysis of variance and Chi-square test, and trends across the years were tested via Cochmn-Armitage Test. RESULTS: Of 6868 patients who underwent TVR between 2005-14, 1601_(23%) were isolated. Over the 10-years period, the number of total and isolated TVR has steadily increased (P<0.001). The proportion of patients undergoing repair has increased compared to replacement. Overall in-hospital mortality was 8.5% and 7.7% (p-0.28).. permanent pacemaker requirement was 11.24% and 10.69%(P-0.53), blood transfusion rates were 32.6% and 37.9% (P<0.001), and the post-procedure length of stay (LOS) was 14.1 +/- 0.44 and 12.5 +/- 0.17 days (P<0.001) after isolated and concomitant TVR respectively. High (26.25%) number of patients were discharged to skilled facility. The operative mortality associated with TV repair was lower than with replacement (6.8% versus 11.15%. P<0.001), but the mortality trend over the 10-years has stayed relatively stable. Independent predictors of mortality were age >50 years, heart failure, cerebrovascular accident, end-stage renal disease, peripheral vascular disease, liver disease, and TV replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Both isolated and concomitant TvR has increased over the last 10 years, however is associated with high mortality, complications, need for skilled facility placement, and longer LOS. The mortality after TV replacement was significantly higher than that after repair.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据