Redo Surgical Mitral Valve Replacement Versus Transcatheter Mitral Valve in Valve From the National Inpatient Sample

Author:

Zia Khan Muhammad1ORCID,Zahid Salman2ORCID,Khan Muhammad U.1,Kichloo Asim3ORCID,Jamal Shakeel3,Mannan Khan Minhas Abdul4,Ullah Waqas5ORCID,Sattar Yasar1ORCID,Balla Sudarshan1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine West Virginia University Heart & Vascular Institute Morgantown WV

2. Department of Medicine Rochester General Hospital Rochester NY

3. St. Mary’s of Saginaw Hospital Saginaw MI

4. Forrest General Hospital Hattiesburg MS

5. Abington Jefferson Health PA

Abstract

Background Redo mitral valve surgery is required in up to one‐third of patients and is associated with significant mortality and morbidity. Valve‐in‐valve transcatheter mitral valve replacement (ViV TMVR) is less invasive and could be considered in those at prohibitive surgical risk. Studies on comparative outcomes of ViV TMVR and redo surgical mitral valve replacement (SMVR) remain limited. Our study aimed to investigate the real‐world outcomes of the above procedures using the National Inpatient Sample database. Methods and Results We analyzed National Inpatient Sample data using the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification ( ICD‐10‐CM ) from September 2015 to December 2018. A total of 495 and 2250 patients underwent redo ViV TMVR and SMVR, respectively. The patients who underwent ViV TMVR were older (77 versus 68 years, P <0.01). Adjusted mortality was higher in the redo SMVR group compared with the ViV TMVR group (7.6% versus <2.8%, P <0.01). Perioperative complications were higher among patients undergoing redo SMVR including blood transfusions (38% versus 7.6%, P <0.01) and acute kidney injury (36.7% versus 13.9%, P <0.01). Cost of care was higher (USD$57 172 versus USD$52 579, P <0.01), length of stay was longer (10 versus 3 days, P <0.01), and discharge to home was lower (20.3% versus 64.6%, P <0.01) in the SMVR group compared with the ViV TMVR group. Conclusions ViV TMVR is associated with lower mortality, periprocedural morbidity, and resource use compared with patients undergoing redo SMVR. ViV TMVR may be a viable option for some patients with mitral prosthesis dysfunction. Studies evaluating long‐term outcomes and durability of ViV TMVR are needed. A patient‐centered approach by the heart team, local institutional expertise, and careful preprocedure planning can help decision‐making about the choice of intervention for the individual patient.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3