Brancato Scott C, Wang Mansen, Spinelli Kateri J, Gandhavadi Maheer, Worrall Neil K, Lehr Eric J, DeBoard Zach M, Fitton Torin P, Leiataua Alison, Piccini Jonathan P, Gluckman Ty J
Center for Cardiovascular Analytics, Research and Data Science (CARDS), Providence Heart Institute, Providence Research Network, Portland, Oregon.
Mercy General Hospital and Dignity Health Heart and Vascular Institute, Sacramento, California.
Heart Rhythm O2. 2021 Dec 24;3(1):32-39. doi: 10.1016/j.hroo.2021.12.003. eCollection 2022 Feb.
Multiple class I and class IIa recommendations exist related to surgical ablation (SA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.
Examine temporal trends and predictors of SA for AF in a large US healthcare system.
We retrospectively analyzed data from the Society for Thoracic Surgery (STS) Adult Cardiac Surgery Database for 21 hospitals in the Providence St. Joseph Health system. All patients with preoperative AF who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR), AVR with CABG surgery (AVR+CABG), isolated mitral valve repair or replacement (MVRr), and MVRr with CABG surgery (MVRr+CABG) from July 1, 2014, to March 31, 2020 were included. Temporal trends in SA were evaluated using the Cochran-Armitage trends test. A multilevel logistic regression model was used to examine patient-, hospital-, and surgeon-level predictors of SA.
Among 3124 patients with preoperative AF, 910 (29.1%) underwent SA. This was performed most often in those undergoing isolated MVRr (n = 324, 44.8%) or MVRr+CABG (n = 75, 35.2%). Rates of SA increased over time and were highly variable between hospitals. Years since graduation from medical school for the primary operator was one of the few predictors of SA: odds ratio (95% confidence interval) = 0.71 (0.56-0.90) for every 10-year increase. Annual surgical (both hospital and operator) and AF catheter ablation volumes were not predictive of SA.
Wide variability in rates of SA for AF exist, underscoring the need for greater preoperative collaboration between cardiologists, electrophysiologists, and cardiac surgeons.
对于接受心脏手术的房颤(AF)患者,存在多项I类和IIa类手术消融(SA)的推荐。
研究美国一个大型医疗系统中房颤SA的时间趋势和预测因素。
我们回顾性分析了普罗维登斯圣约瑟夫医疗系统中21家医院的胸外科医师协会(STS)成人心脏手术数据库中的数据。纳入了2014年7月1日至2020年3月31日期间接受单纯冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)、单纯主动脉瓣置换术(AVR)、AVR联合CABG手术(AVR+CABG)、单纯二尖瓣修复或置换术(MVRr)以及MVRr联合CABG手术(MVRr+CABG)且术前患有房颤的所有患者。使用 Cochr an - Armitage趋势检验评估SA的时间趋势。采用多水平逻辑回归模型研究患者、医院和外科医生层面SA的预测因素。
在3124例术前房颤患者中,910例(29.1%)接受了SA。SA最常发生在接受单纯MVRr(n = 324,44.8%)或MVRr+CABG(n = 75,35.2%)的患者中。SA的发生率随时间增加,且在不同医院之间差异很大。主刀医生自医学院毕业的年限是SA的少数预测因素之一:每增加10年,优势比(95%置信区间)= 0.71(0.56 - 0.90)。年度手术量(医院和医生的)以及房颤导管消融量均不能预测SA。
房颤SA的发生率存在很大差异,这凸显了心脏病专家、电生理学家和心脏外科医生术前加强协作的必要性。