Suppr超能文献

衰弱对住院行导管消融治疗心房颤动患者的影响。

Impact of frailty in hospitalized patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.

机构信息

Department of Internal Medicine, Louisiana State University, Shreveport, Louisiana, USA.

Department of Medicine, John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook County, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

出版信息

J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2024 Oct;35(10):1929-1938. doi: 10.1111/jce.16383. Epub 2024 Jul 29.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Catheter Ablation (CA) is an effective treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, frail elderly patients have been understudied due to their exclusion from landmark trials.

OBJECTIVES

Our study aims to evaluate outcomes in this population.

METHODS

The national readmission database (2016-2020) was queried, and frailty categories were defined based on hospital risk frailty scores ≦5 as low while >5 as intermediate/high frailty (IHF). We used multivariate regression and propensity-matched analysis to compare outcomes in patients undergoing CA for atrial fibrillation based on frailty index.

RESULTS

Among 55 936 CAs for AF, 33,248 patients had low frailty, while 22 688 had intermediate/high frailty (IHF). After propensity matching (N 12 448), IHF patients were found to have higher adverse events, including mortality (3% vs. 0.3%, p < .001), stroke (1.9% vs. 0.2%, p < .001), acute heart failure (53.8% vs. 42.2%, p < .001), AKI (42.5% vs. 6.8%, p < .001), pericardial complications (2.8 vs. 1.6%, p < .001), respiratory complications (27.8 vs. 7.2%, p < .001), major adverse cardiovascular events (21.2 vs. 9.4%, p < .001) and net adverse events (76.7 vs. 55%, p < .001). IHF patients had higher readmissions at 30 (15.5 vs. 12.6%, p < .001), 90 (31.9 vs. 25.1%, p < .001), and 180-day (41 vs. 34.7%, p < .001) intervals. A higher median length of stay (LOS) (7 vs. 3 days, p < .001) and cost ($44 287 vs. $27 517, p < .001) at index admission and subsequent readmissions were also observed (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Intermediate/high frailty patients undergoing catheter ablation had worse clinical outcomes, higher healthcare burden, and readmission rates. LOS has decreased in both groups from 2016 to 2020; however, total cost has increased.

摘要

背景

导管消融(CA)是治疗心房颤动(AF)的有效方法。然而,由于虚弱的老年患者被排除在标志性试验之外,因此对他们的研究较少。

目的

本研究旨在评估该人群的结局。

方法

查询全国再入院数据库(2016-2020 年),根据医院风险虚弱评分≤5 分为低危,而>5 分为中危/高危虚弱(IHF)。我们使用多变量回归和倾向匹配分析比较了基于衰弱指数行 CA 治疗房颤患者的结局。

结果

在 55936 例房颤 CA 中,33248 例患者衰弱程度较低,22688 例患者为中危/高危衰弱(IHF)。经过倾向匹配(N=12448)后,IHF 患者的不良事件发生率更高,包括死亡率(3%比 0.3%,p<0.001)、卒中(1.9%比 0.2%,p<0.001)、急性心力衰竭(53.8%比 42.2%,p<0.001)、急性肾损伤(AKI)(42.5%比 6.8%,p<0.001)、心包并发症(2.8%比 1.6%,p<0.001)、呼吸并发症(27.8%比 7.2%,p<0.001)、主要不良心血管事件(21.2%比 9.4%,p<0.001)和净不良事件(76.7%比 55%,p<0.001)。IHF 患者在 30(15.5%比 12.6%,p<0.001)、90(31.9%比 25.1%,p<0.001)和 180 天(41%比 34.7%,p<0.001)时的再入院率更高。中位住院时间(LOS)(7 天比 3 天,p<0.001)和索引入院及随后再入院的医疗费用($44287 比 $27517,p<0.001)也更高(p<0.001)。

结论

行导管消融术的中危/高危衰弱患者的临床结局更差,医疗负担和再入院率更高。2016 年至 2020 年,两组的 LOS 均有所下降;然而,总成本却有所增加。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验