Impact of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Survival after Mitral Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (07) ◽  
pp. 538-545 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ho-Young Hwang ◽  
Suk-Ho Sohn ◽  
Myoung-jin Jang
Keyword(s):  
Mitral Valve ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Early Mortality ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
The Impact

Background Numerous studies have demonstrated a negative impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) on long-term clinical outcomes after aortic valve replacement. However, the impact of PPM after mitral valve replacement (MVR) on clinical outcomes is still controversial. This study was conducted to evaluate the impact of PPM on early and long-term survival after MVR. Methods A literature search of five databases was performed. The primary and secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and early mortality, respectively. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the risk of bias, patients' age, proportion of female patients, and proportion of patients with mechanical MVR. Results Eleven nonrandomized studies including 8,072 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The overall incidence of PPM was 58.0% (range: 10.4–85.9%). The odds ratio of early mortality in nine studies was not significantly different between the PPM and non-PPM patients (odds ratio: 1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98–1.86). A pooled analysis in 11 studies demonstrated that all-cause mortality after MVR was higher in the PPM than non-PPM patients (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.09–1.77). This analysis revealed a moderate to high heterogeneity (I 2 = 69.4%). When pooled analyses were performed in two subgroups according to the proportion of patients with mechanical MVR, there were low heterogeneity in each group. No other subgroup analyses demonstrated a significant difference in the HR of all-cause mortality. Funnel plots and Egger's tests showed no visually and statistically significant publication bias. Conclusion The present meta-analysis indicates that PPM negatively affects long-term survival after MVR.

scholarly journals Mitral Valve Surgery in Patients With Rheumatic Heart Disease: Repair vs. Replacement

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guangguo Fu ◽  
Zhuoming Zhou ◽  
Suiqing Huang ◽  
Guangxian Chen ◽  
Mengya Liang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Disease ◽  
Mitral Valve ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Rheumatic Heart Disease ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Early Mortality ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Rheumatic Heart

Background: High morbidity and mortality caused by rheumatic heart disease (RHD) are global burdens, especially in low-income and developing countries. Whether mitral valve repair (MVP) benefits RHD patients remains controversial. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of MVP and mitral valve replacement (MVR) in RHD patients.Methods and Results: A systematic literature search was conducted in major databases, including Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library, until 17 December 2020. Studies comparing MVP and MVR in RHD patients were retained. Outcomes included early mortality, long-term survival, freedom from reoperation, postoperative infective endocarditis, thromboembolic events, hemorrhagic events, and freedom from valve-related adverse events. Eleven studies that met the inclusion criteria were included. Of a total of 5,654 patients, 1,951 underwent MVP, and 3,703 underwent MVR. Patients who undergo MVP can benefit from a higher long-term survival rate (HR 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55–0.95; P = 0.020; I2 = 44%), a lower risk of early mortality (RR 0.62; 95% CI, 0.38–1.01; P = 0.060; I2 = 42%), and the composite outcomes of valve-related adverse events (HR 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38–0.94; P = 0.030; I2 = 25%). However, a higher risk of reoperation was observed in the MVP group (HR 2.60; 95% CI, 1.89–3.57; P<0.001; I2 = 4%). Patients who underwent concomitant aortic valve replacement (AVR) in the two groups had comparable long-term survival rates, although the trend still favored MVP.Conclusions: For RHD patients, MVP can reduce early mortality, and improve long-term survival and freedom from valve-related adverse events. However, MVP was associated with a higher risk of reoperation.Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=228307.

Survival after Aortic Valve Replacement with Bovine or Porcine Valve Prostheses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (04) ◽  
pp. 282-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie Glaser ◽  
Veronica Jackson ◽  
Anders Franco-Cereceda ◽  
Ulrik Sartipy
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Porcine Bioprosthesis

Background Bovine and porcine bioprostheses are commonly used for surgical aortic valve replacement. It is unknown if the long-term survival differs between the two valve types.We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare survival in patients who underwent aortic valve replacement and received a bovine or a porcine prosthesis. Methods We performed a systematic search of Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Cohort studies that compared survival between patients who underwent aortic valve replacement and received either a bovine or a porcine bioprosthesis and that reported overall long-term survival with hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were included. Two authors independently reviewed articles considered for inclusion, extracted the information from each study, and performed the quality assessment. We performed a meta-analysis using a random effects model to calculate the pooled HR (95% CI) for all-cause mortality. We did sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of our findings. Results Seven studies published between 2010 and 2015 were included, and the combined study population was 49,190 patients. Of these, 32,235 (66%) received a bovine, and 16,955 (34%) received a porcine bioprosthesis. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between patients who received a bovine compared with a porcine bioprosthesis (pooled HR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.92–1.09). Heterogeneity between studies was moderate (55.8%, p = 0.04). Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis suggest no difference in survival between patients who received a bovine versus a porcine bioprosthesis after aortic valve replacement. Our study provides valuable evidence for the continuing use of both bovine and porcine bioprosthetic valves for surgical aortic valve replacement.

scholarly journals Long-term survival after Carpentier-Edwards Perimount aortic valve replacement in Western Denmark: a multi-centre observational study

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lytfi Krasniqi ◽  
Mads P. Kronby ◽  
Lars P. S. Riber
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background This study describes the long-term survival, risk of reoperation and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing solitary surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with a Carpentier-Edwards Perimount (CE-P) bioprosthetic in Western Denmark. The renewed interest in SAVR is based on the questioning regarding the long-term survival since new aortic replacement technique such as transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) probably have shorter durability, why assessment of long-term survival could be a key issue for patients. Methods From November 1999 to November 2013 a cohort of a total of 1604 patients with a median age of 73 years (IQR: 69–78) undergoing solitary SAVR with CE-P in Western Denmark was obtained November 2018 from the Western Danish Heart Registry (WDHR). The primary endpoint was long-term survival from all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints were survival free from major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events (MACCE), risk of reoperation, cause of late death, patient-prothesis mismatch, risk of AMI, stroke, pacemaker or ICD implantation and postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF). Time-to-event analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier curve, cumulative incidence function was performed with Nelson-Aalen cumulative hazard estimates. Cox regression was applied to detect risk factors for death and reoperation. Results In-hospital mortality was 2.7% and 30-day mortality at 3.4%. The 5-, 10- and 15-year survival from all-cause mortality was 77, 52 and 24%, respectively. Survival without MACCE was 80% after 10 years. Significant risk factors of mortality were small valves, smoking and EuroSCORE II ≥4%. The risk of reoperation was < 5% after 7.5 years and significant risk factors were valve prosthesis-patient mismatch and EuroSCORE II ≥4%. Conclusions Patients undergoing aortic valve replacement with a Carpentier-Edwards Perimount valve shows a very satisfying long-term survival. Future research should aim to investigate biological valves long-term durability for comparison of different SAVR to different TAVR in long perspective.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Surgery for the Treatment of Gastric Cancer Liver Metastases: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Factors

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 1141
Author(s):  
Gianpaolo Marte ◽  
Andrea Tufo ◽  
Francesca Steccanella ◽  
Ester Marra ◽  
Piera Federico ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Liver Metastases ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Multidisciplinary Treatment ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
The Impact

Background: In the last 10 years, the management of patients with gastric cancer liver metastases (GCLM) has changed from chemotherapy alone, towards a multidisciplinary treatment with liver surgery playing a leading role. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the efficacy of hepatectomy for GCLM and to analyze the impact of related prognostic factors on long-term outcomes. Methods: The databases PubMed (Medline), EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles from January 2010 to September 2020. We included prospective and retrospective studies that reported the outcomes after hepatectomy for GCLM. A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of prognostic factors was performed. Results: We included 40 studies, including 1573 participants who underwent hepatic resection for GCLM. Post-operative morbidity and 30-day mortality rates were 24.7% and 1.6%, respectively. One-year, 3-years, and 5-years overall survival (OS) were 72%, 37%, and 26%, respectively. The 1-year, 3-years, and 5-years disease-free survival (DFS) were 44%, 24%, and 22%, respectively. Well-moderately differentiated tumors, pT1–2 and pN0–1 adenocarcinoma, R0 resection, the presence of solitary metastasis, unilobar metastases, metachronous metastasis, and chemotherapy were all strongly positively associated to better OS and DFS. Conclusion: In the present study, we demonstrated that hepatectomy for GCLM is feasible and provides benefits in terms of long-term survival. Identification of patient subgroups that could benefit from surgical treatment is mandatory in a multidisciplinary setting.

scholarly journals The Prospects of Secondary Moderate Mitral Regurgitation after Aortic Valve Replacement —Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (19) ◽  
pp. 7335
Author(s):  
Ilija Bilbija ◽  
Milos Matkovic ◽  
Marko Cubrilo ◽  
Nemanja Aleksic ◽  
Jelena Milin Lazovic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Mitral Regurgitation ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Reverse Remodeling ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival

Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis represents one of the most frequent surgical procedures on heart valves. These patients often have concomitant mitral regurgitation. To reveal whether the moderate mitral regurgitation will improve after aortic valve replacement alone, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We identified 27 studies with 4452 patients that underwent aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis and had co-existent mitral regurgitation. Primary end point was the impact of aortic valve replacement on the concomitant mitral regurgitation. Secondary end points were the analysis of the left ventricle reverse remodeling and long-term survival. Our results showed that there was significant improvement in mitral regurgitation postoperatively (RR, 1.65; 95% CI 1.36–2.00; p < 0.00001) with the average decrease of 0.46 (WMD; 95% CI 0.35–0.57; p < 0.00001). The effect is more pronounced in the elderly population. Perioperative mortality was higher (p < 0.0001) and long-term survival significantly worse (p < 0.00001) in patients that had moderate/severe mitral regurgitation preoperatively. We conclude that after aortic valve replacement alone there are fair chances but for only slight improvement in concomitant mitral regurgitation. The secondary moderate mitral regurgitation should be addressed at the time of aortic valve replacement. A more conservative approach should be followed for elderly and high-risk patients.

scholarly journals Long-Term Effect of Non-Selective Beta-Blockers in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis After Myocardial Infarction—A Nationwide Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheng-Fu Liu ◽  
Chih-Kuo Lee ◽  
Kuan-Chih Huang ◽  
Lian-Yu Lin ◽  
Mu-Yang Hsieh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Protective Effect ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Risk Of Mortality ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
The Impact

Objectives: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an independent nontraditional risk factor for incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) and post-MI outcome is impaired in the RA population. Use of beta-blockers improves the long-term survival after MI in the general population while the protective effect of beta-blockers in RA patients is not clear. We investigate the impact of beta-blockers on the long-term outcome of MI among RA patients.Methods: We identified RA subjects from the registries for catastrophic illness and myocardial infarction from 2003 to 2013. The enrolled subjects were divided into three groups according to the prescription of beta-blockers (non-user, non-selective, and β1-selective beta-blockers). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. We adjusted clinical variables and utilized propensity scores to balance confounding bias. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate the incidence of mortality in different groups.Results: A total of 1,292 RA patients with myocardial infarction were enrolled, where 424 (32.8%), 281 (21.7%), and 587 (45.5%) subjects used non-user, non-selective, and β1-selective beta-blockers, respectively. Use of beta-blockers was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality after adjustment with comorbidities, medications (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.871; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.727–0.978), and propensity score (HR 0.882; 95% CI 0.724–0.982). Compared with β1-selective beta-blockers, treatment with non-selective beta-blockers (HR 0.856; 95% CI 0.702–0.984) was significantly related to lower risk of mortality. The protective effect of non-selective beta-blockers remained in different subgroups including sex and different anti-inflammatory drugs.Conclusion: Use of beta-blockers improved prognosis in post-MI patients with RA. Treatment with non-selective beta-blockers was significantly associated with reduced risk of mortality in RA patients after MI rather than β1-selective beta-blockers.

Abstract 3172: Impact of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Long-Term Survival After Aortic Valve Replacement

Circulation ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 116 (suppl_16) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dania Mohty ◽  
Jean G. Dumesnil ◽  
Najmeddine Echahidi ◽  
Patrick Mathieu ◽  
François Dagenais ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Operative Mortality ◽  
Independent Predictor ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Time Of Operation ◽  
The Impact

Background: We recently reported that Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch (PPM) is an independent predictor of operative mortality in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of PPM on late postoperative survival. Methods and Results: Between 1992 and 2005, 2653 patients (age: 68±10 years; 61% of males) underwent AVR in our institution. Patients who died at the time of operation or within 30 days were excluded from this study. The projected indexed effective orifice area (EOAi) was derived from the published normal in vivo EOA values for each model and size of prosthesis and PPM was classified as severe if the EOAi was ≤0.65 cm 2 /m 2 , moderate if it was > 0.65 cm 2 /m 2 and ≤ 0.85 cm 2 /m 2 , or not clinically significant if >0.85 cm 2 /m 2 . PPM was severe in 40 patients (2%), moderate in 797 (31%), and not significant in 1739 (67%). Patients with severe PPM had higher proportion of female gender (67% vs. 38%; P=0.0002) and hypertension (68% vs. 55%, p=0.02) and larger body surface (1.86±0.25 vs. 1.77±0.20, p=0.02). For patients with severe PPM, 5-year survival rate (74±8%) and 10-year survival rate (40±10%) were significantly (p=0.008) less than for patients with moderate PPM (5-yr: 81±2% and 10-yr: 57±3%) or no significant PPM (5-yr: 84±1% and 10-yr: 61±2%). On multivariate analysis after adjustment for other predictors of outcome, severe PPM was associated with increased overall mortality (Hazard ratio 1.38, [95% Confidence Interval 1.04 –1.75]; (p=0.02) Conclusion: In our previous study, we reported that severe PPM is a powerful risk factor for operative mortality. The results of the present study now suggest that severe PPM is also an independent predictor of long-term mortality. Hence, for the patients who are identified to be at risk of severe PPM at the time of operation, every effort should be made to implant a prosthesis with a larger EOA. Funded by: Canadian Institutes of Health Research

P3584Optimal medical therapy improves survival in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy: an analysis of the STICH trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
N Wolfe ◽  
J D Mitchell ◽  
D L Brown
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Coronary Artery ◽  
Medical Therapy ◽  
Relative Reduction ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Ischaemic Cardiomyopathy ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Stich Trial ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Prior studies have demonstrated underuse of optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) after revascularization. However, there are limited studies assessing compliance with OMT on long-term survival in patients with CAD and no studies evaluating the impact of OMT in patients with severe CAD and reduced left ventricular (LV) function. The Surgical Treatment for Ischaemic Heart Failure (STICH) Trial was a randomized clinical trial that compared coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) with medical therapy versus medical therapy alone in the treatment of ischemic cardiomyopathy. Purpose This study sought to determine compliance with OMT over time and the impact of OMT compliance on survival in patients with or without revascularization. Methods STICH was a multicenter, randomized clinical trial of patients with an LV ejection fraction of 35% or less and CAD amenable to CABG who were randomized to CABG plus medical therapy (N=610) or medical therapy alone (N=602). A medication history was obtained at hospital discharge or 30 days after enrollment, 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years. OMT was defined as the combination of at least 1 antiplatelet drug, a statin, a beta-blocker, and an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Comparison of mortality between the OMT and non-OMT groups was performed using multivariate Cox regression modeling with OMT as a time-dependent covariate. Results Of the 1212 patients randomized, at a median follow-up of 9.8 years, all-cause mortality was 58.9% in the CABG group and 66.1% in the medical therapy group. In the CABG arm, 63.6% of patients were on OMT throughout the study period compared to 66.5% of patients in the medical therapy arm (p=0.3). Those on OMT were younger (59.6 vs. 61.4 years, p<0.001); were more often in NYHA class I-II (67.4% vs. 56%, p<0.001); and lower rates of atrial fibrillation (9.4% vs. 18.1%, p<0.001), current smoking (18.6% vs. 24.5%, p=0.015), and depression (4.8% vs. 8.8%, p=0.005). Those on OMT had higher rates of hyperlipidemia (63.8% vs. 54.4%, p=0.001) and prior myocardial infarction (79.4% vs. 73.1%, p=0.01). There was no difference in sex, diabetes, and hypertension between those on OMT and non-OMT. In multivariate survival analysis, OMT was associated with a significant reduction in mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.58–0.81; p<0.001). The treatment effect with OMT (31% relative reduction in mortality over 10 years) was numerically greater than the treatment effect of CABG (24% relative reduction in mortality with CABG versus medical therapy alone). Conclusions OMT improves long-term survival in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy regardless of revascularization status. Strategies to improve OMT use and adherence in this population is needed to maximize survival.

scholarly journals Bronchiectasis and increased mortality in patients with corticosteroid-dependent severe asthma: a nationwide population study

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 175346662096303
Author(s):  
Hayoung Choi ◽  
Hyun Lee ◽  
Jiin Ryu ◽  
Sung Jun Chung ◽  
Dong Won Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Respiratory Diseases ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Study Cohort ◽  
Limited Information ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
The Impact

Background: Long-term corticosteroid (CS) use is associated with increased mortality in patients with asthma, and comorbid bronchiectasis is also associated with frequent asthma exacerbation and increased healthcare use. However, there is limited information on whether bronchiectasis further increases mortality in patients with CS-dependent asthma. This study examined the impact of bronchiectasis on mortality in patients with CS-dependent asthma. Methods: A retrospective cohort of patients with CS-dependent asthma ⩾18 years old was established using records from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database from 2005 to 2015. Patients with CS-dependent asthma with and without bronchiectasis were matched by age, sex, type of insurance, and Charlson comorbidity index. We evaluated the hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality in patients with bronchiectasis compared with those without bronchiectasis. Results: The study cohort included 754 patients with CS-dependent asthma with bronchiectasis and 3016 patients with CS-dependent asthma without bronchiectasis. Patients with CS-dependent asthma with bronchiectasis had a higher all-cause mortality than those without bronchiectasis (8429/100,000 versus 6962/100,000 person-years, p < 0.001). The adjusted HR for mortality in patients with CS-dependent asthma with bronchiectasis relative to those without bronchiectasis was 1.33 (95% confidence interval, 1.18–1.50), and the association was primarily significant for respiratory diseases (subdistribution HR = 1.65, 95% confidence interval, 1.42–1.92). Conclusions: Bronchiectasis further increases all-cause mortality in patients with CS-dependent asthma, a trend that was especially associated with respiratory diseases including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Strategies to improve treatment outcomes in patients with CS-dependent asthma with bronchiectasis are urgently needed to improve long-term survival. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document