4.3 Article

Comparative Outcomes of Patients With Advanced Renal Dysfunction Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the United States From 2011 to 2014

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.117.005477

关键词

aortic valve; assessment, outcomes; prevalence; renal insufficiency, chronic; transcatheter aortic valve replacement

资金

  1. Brown family endowed chair in cardiovascular medicine
  2. David Whitmire Hurst Jr Foundation
  3. Haslam Family Endowed Chair in Cardiovascular Medicine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background-Renal dysfunction is intricately linked to aortic stenosis, with over 25% patients presenting for transcatheter aortic valve replacement having chronic kidney disease (CKD). Prevalence and outcomes of patients with CKD, especially those with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), are controversial. We aimed to compare in-hospital outcomes of patients with CKD or ESRD with those patients with no CKD/ESRD. Methods and Results-Data were obtained using the national inpatient sample between the years 2011 and 2014. We used the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition, Clinical Modification procedure codes 350.5 and 350.6 to identify patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Primary outcome of interest was in-hospital mortality. A 2-tailed P value <0.01 was considered to denote statistical significance for all analyses. We identified 42 189 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement between the years 2011 and 2014. Of these, 62.1% (n=26 229) had no CKD/ESRD, 33.7% (n=14 252) had CKD, and 4% (n=1708) had ESRD. Patients with CKD or ESRD had greater in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay, hemorrhage requiring transfusion, and permanent pacemaker implantation (P<0.001). Conclusions-Patients with CKD and ESRD have increased in-hospital mortality and periprocedural adverse events with longer hospital length of stay, when compared with those without CKD

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

4.3
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