Suppr超能文献

机器人二尖瓣修复术在老年人中的应用:胸外科医师学会数据库分析。

Robotic Mitral Valve Repair in Older Individuals: An Analysis of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database.

机构信息

Department of General Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.

Division of Cardiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.

出版信息

Ann Thorac Surg. 2018 Nov;106(5):1388-1393. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.05.074. Epub 2018 Jun 30.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

National outcomes of robotic mitral valve repair (rMVr) compared with sternotomy (sMVr) in older patients are currently unknown.

METHODS

From 2011 to 2014, all patients aged 65 years and older undergoing MVr in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database linked to Medicare claims data were identified. Patients who underwent rMVr were propensity matched to patients who underwent sMVr. Standard differences and falsification outcome of baseline characteristics were tested to ensure a balanced match. Cox models were used to calculate 3-year mortality, heart failure readmission, and mitral valve reintervention, adjusting for competing risks where appropriate.

RESULTS

After matching, 503 rMVr patients from 65 centers and 503 sMVr from 251 centers were included. There were no significant differences in comorbidities or falsification outcome. Cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times were longer with rMVr versus sMVr at 125 versus 102 minutes (p < 0.0001) and 85 versus 75 minutes (p < 0.0001), respectively. The rMVr patients had shorter intensive care unit (27 vs 47 hours, p < 0.0001) and hospital stay (5 vs 6 days, p < 0.0001), less frequent transfusion (21% vs 35%, p < 0.0001), and less atrial fibrillation (28% vs 40%, p < 0.0001). Three-year mortality (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.68 to 2.16; p = 0.52), heart failure readmission (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.80 to 2.52, p = 0.10), and mitral valve reintervention (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.15 to 1.18; p = 0.22) did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The rMVr procedure was associated with less atrial fibrillation, less frequent transfusion requirement, and shorter intensive care unit and hospital stay, without a significant difference in 3-year mortality, heart failure readmission, or mitral valve reintervention. In older patients, rMVr confers short-term advantages without a detriment to midterm outcomes.

摘要

背景

目前尚不清楚机器人二尖瓣修复术(rMVr)与胸骨切开术(sMVr)在老年患者中的全国结果。

方法

2011 年至 2014 年,在与医疗保险索赔数据相关联的胸外科医师学会成人心脏手术数据库中,确定了所有年龄在 65 岁及以上接受二尖瓣修复术的患者。将接受 rMVr 的患者与接受 sMVr 的患者进行倾向评分匹配。测试了基线特征的标准差异和伪造结果,以确保平衡匹配。适当时使用 Cox 模型计算 3 年死亡率、心力衰竭再入院和二尖瓣再干预,调整竞争风险。

结果

匹配后,来自 65 个中心的 503 例 rMVr 患者和来自 251 个中心的 503 例 sMVr 患者纳入研究。两组患者的合并症或伪造结果无显著差异。与 sMVr 相比,rMVr 的体外循环和主动脉阻断时间分别延长至 125 分钟与 102 分钟(p < 0.0001)和 85 分钟与 75 分钟(p < 0.0001)。rMVr 患者的重症监护病房(27 小时与 47 小时,p < 0.0001)和住院时间(5 天与 6 天,p < 0.0001)更短,输血频率(21%与 35%,p < 0.0001)和心房颤动(28%与 40%,p < 0.0001)较少。3 年死亡率(风险比,1.21;95%置信区间,0.68 至 2.16;p = 0.52)、心力衰竭再入院(风险比,1.42;95%置信区间,0.80 至 2.52,p = 0.10)和二尖瓣再干预(风险比,0.42;95%置信区间,0.15 至 1.18;p = 0.22)在两组之间无差异。

结论

rMVr 手术与较少的心房颤动、较少的输血需求以及较短的重症监护病房和住院时间相关,而 3 年死亡率、心力衰竭再入院或二尖瓣再干预无显著差异。在老年患者中,rMVr 具有短期优势,对中期结果无不利影响。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验