Hospital Variation in Aortic Valve Replacement Approach Selection for Aortic Stenosis in Patients Under 65

65岁以下主动脉瓣狭窄患者主动脉瓣置换术入路选择方面的医院差异

阅读:1

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Although surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has a class 1 A recommendation for treating severe aortic stenosis in patients <65 years, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in this population is increasing. This study evaluates the impact of hospital variation in TAVR use in patients <65 years on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Using US 3-state data from 2013 through 2021, we assessed the hospitals' preference for TAVR vs SAVR by generating the observed-to-expected TAVR ratio. Hospitals were ranked into tertiles based on their ratio. The risk of mortality, stroke, infective endocarditis (IE), and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) for patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) in each tertile was assessed at 30 days and 6 years using logistic regression and Cox-proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Among 189 hospitals, 103 were in the low, 55 in the medium, and 31 in the high-tertile. Patients who underwent AVR in the high tertile had lower rates of comorbidities than patients in mid or low tertiles. Patients at high and medium ratio hospitals had higher rates of PPI at 30 days than those from low TAVR-use hospitals (17% vs 7.6% vs 5.6%, P < .001). Patients in the high vs low tertile experienced a higher 6-year risk-adjusted mortality (8.1% vs 5.3%, HR: 1.63 [1.37-1.93], P < .001), stroke (2.2% vs 1.1%, sub-distribution hazard ratio [sHR]: 2.15 [1.50-3.06], P < .001), and IE (2.9% vs 0.3%, sHR: 9.91 [5.59-17.56], P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The decision on TAVR utilization in patients younger than 65 should be made carefully considering the patient's clinical profile and life expectancy.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。