Clinic of Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Austria.
Laboratory for Cardiac and Thoracic Diagnosis, Regeneration and Applied Immunology, Austria.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2024 Jan 2;65(1). doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezad308.
This population-based cohort study investigated mid-term outcome after surgical aortic valve replacement with a bioprosthetic or mechanical valve prosthesis in patients aged <50 years in a European social welfare state.
We analysed patient data from the main social insurance carriers in Austria (2010-2020). Subsequent patient-level record linkage with national health data provided patient characteristics and clinical outcome. Survival, reoperation, myocardial infarction, heart failure, embolic stroke or intracerebral haemorrhage, bleeding other than intracerebral haemorrhage and major adverse cardiac events were evaluated as outcomes.
A total of 991 patients were analysed. Regarding demographics, no major differences between groups were observed. Multivariable Cox regression revealed no significant difference in overall survival (P = 0.352) with a median follow-up time of 6.2 years. Reoperation-free survival was decreased (hazard ratio = 1.560 [95% CI: 1.076-2.262], P = 0.019) and the risk for reoperation was increased (hazard ratio = 2.770 [95% CI: 1.402-5.472], P = 0.003) in patients who received bioprostheses. Estimated probability of death after reoperation was 0.23 (CL: 0.08-0.35) after 2 years and 0.34 (CL: 0.06-0.53) after 10 years over both groups. Regarding further outcomes, no significant differences between the two groups were observed.
In patients below 50 years of age receiving aortic valve replacement, implantation of bioprostheses when compared to mechanical heart valve prostheses was associated with a significantly higher rate of reoperations and reduced reoperation-free survival. Nevertheless, we could not observe a difference in overall survival. However, long-term follow-up has to evaluate that a significantly lower rate of reoperations may translate in consistently improved long-term survival.
本基于人群的队列研究调查了在一个欧洲福利国家中,50 岁以下接受生物假体或机械瓣膜假体主动脉瓣置换术的患者的中期结果。
我们分析了奥地利主要社会保险机构(2010-2020 年)的患者数据。随后,与国家健康数据的患者水平记录链接提供了患者特征和临床结果。将生存、再次手术、心肌梗死、心力衰竭、栓塞性中风或颅内出血、颅内出血以外的出血和主要不良心脏事件评估为结局。
共分析了 991 例患者。在人口统计学方面,两组之间没有明显差异。多变量 Cox 回归显示,在中位随访时间为 6.2 年的情况下,总生存率无显著差异(P=0.352)。无再次手术生存率降低(风险比=1.560[95%CI:1.076-2.262],P=0.019),接受生物假体的患者再次手术风险增加(风险比=2.770[95%CI:1.402-5.472],P=0.003)。在两组患者中,术后 2 年的死亡率估计为 0.23(CL:0.08-0.35),术后 10 年的死亡率估计为 0.34(CL:0.06-0.53)。关于进一步的结果,两组之间没有观察到显著差异。
在 50 岁以下接受主动脉瓣置换术的患者中,与机械心脏瓣膜假体相比,植入生物假体与更高的再手术率和降低的无再手术生存率相关。然而,我们没有观察到总体生存率的差异。然而,长期随访必须评估,较低的再手术率是否会转化为持续改善的长期生存率。