RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of patients undergoing valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV TAVR) versus redo surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS: This was a retrospective study using institutional databases of transcatheter (2013-2022) and surgical (2011-2022) aortic valve replacements. Patients who underwent ViV TAVR were compared with patients who underwent redo isolated SAVR. Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier survival estimation and Cox regression were performed. Cumulative incidence functions were generated for heart failure readmissions. RESULTS: A total of 4200 TAVRs and 2306 isolated SAVRs were performed. Of these, there were 198 patients who underwent ViV TAVR and 147 patients who underwent redo SAVR. Operative mortality was 2% in each group, but observed to expected operative mortality in the redo SAVR group was higher than in the ViV TAVR group (1.2 vs 0.32). Those who underwent redo SAVR were more likely to require transfusions and reoperation for bleeding, to have new-onset renal failure requiring dialysis, and to require a permanent pacemaker postoperatively than those in the ViV group. Mean gradient was significantly lower in the redo SAVR group than in the ViV group at 30 days and 1 year. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates at 1 year were comparable, and on multivariable Cox regression, ViV TAVR was not significantly associated with an increased hazard of death compared with redo SAVR (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.65-2.99; P = .40). Competing-risk cumulative incidence estimates for heart-failure readmissions were higher in the ViV cohort. CONCLUSIONS: ViV TAVR and redo SAVR were associated with comparable mortality. Patients who underwent redo SAVR had lower postoperative mean gradients and greater freedom from heart failure readmissions, but they also had more postoperative complications than the VIV group, despite their lower baseline risk profiles.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to evaluate the impact of central aortic versus peripheral cannulation on outcomes after acute type A aortic dissection repair. METHODS: This was an observational study using an institutional database of acute type A aortic dissection repairs from 2007 to 2021. Patients were stratified according to central, subclavian, or femoral cannulation. Kaplan-Meier survival estimation and multivariable Cox regression were performed. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 577 patients who underwent acute type A aortic dissection repair. Of these, central cannulation was used in 490 patients (84.9%), subclavian cannulation was used in 54 patients (9.4%), and femoral cannulation was used in 33 patients (5.7%). Rates of peripheral vascular disease, aortic insufficiency moderate or greater, and cerebral malperfusion differed significantly among the groups, but baseline characteristics were otherwise comparable (P > .05). Operative mortality was lowest in the central cannulation group (9.8%), but this did not differ significantly among the groups. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were similar among the groups. On multivariable Cox regression, cannulation strategy was not significantly associated with long-term survival. CONCLUSIONS: Acute type A aortic dissection repair can be safely performed through central aortic cannulation, with outcomes comparable to those obtained with subclavian or femoral cannulation.
RESUMEN
Objective: Oral anticoagulation is a standard of care for thromboembolic stroke prevention in individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF). Social determinants of health have had limited investigation in AF and particularly in access to anticoagulation. We examined the relation between area deprivation index (ADI) and anticoagulation in individuals at risk of stroke due to AF. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with incident, non-valvular AF from 2015-2020 receiving care at a large, regional health center. We extracted demographics, medications, and problem lists and used administrative coding to identify comorbid conditions and relevant covariates, and individual-level residential address to ascertain ADI. We examined the relation between ADI and receipt of prescribed oral anticoagulation (warfarin or direct-acting oral anticoagulant, or DOAC) at 90 days following AF diagnosis in multivariable-adjusted models. Results: Following exclusions, the dataset included 20,210 individuals (age 74.5±10.9 years; 51% women; 94% white race). In multivariable-adjusted analyses, individuals in the highest quartile of ADI had a 16% lower likelihood of receiving anticoagulation prescription than those in the lowest ADI quartile (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.84; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 0.75-0.95) at 90 days following AF diagnosis. In those receiving anticoagulation, individuals in the highest ADI quartile had a 24% lower likelihood of receiving a DOAC prescription as opposed to warfarin prescription than those in the lowest quartile (OR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60-0.96) at 90 days following AF diagnosis. Conclusions: We demonstrate the association of higher neighborhood deprivation as determined by ADI with decreased likelihood of (1) anticoagulation prescribing for stroke prevention in AF and (2) prescription of a DOAC when any oral anticoagulation is prescribed. Our results suggest neighborhood-based health inequities in the receipt of anticoagulation prescription for stroke prevention in AF in a large, regional health care system.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Pulmonary artery catheterization provides continuous monitoring of hemodynamic parameters that may aid in the perioperative management of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. However, prior data suggest that pulmonary artery catheterization has limited benefit in intensive care and surgical settings. Thus, this study sought to determine the impact of pulmonary artery catheter insertion on short-term postoperative outcomes in a large, contemporaneous cohort of patients undergoing open cardiac surgery compared with standard central venous pressure monitoring. METHODS: This was an observational study of open cardiac surgeries from 2010 to 2018. Patients with pulmonary artery catheter insertion were identified and matched against patients without pulmonary artery catheter insertion via 1:1 nearest neighbor propensity matching. Multivariable analysis was performed to assess the impact of pulmonary artery catheterization on operative mortality in the overall cohort, as well as recent heart failure, mitral valve disease, and tricuspid insufficiency subgroups. RESULTS: Of the 11,820 patients undergoing (Society of Thoracic Surgeons indexed) coronary or valvular surgery, 4605 (39.0%) had pulmonary artery catheter insertion. Propensity score matching yielded 3519 evenly balanced pairs. Compared with central venous pressure monitoring, pulmonary artery catheter use was not associated with improved operative mortality in the overall cohort or in the recent heart failure, mitral valve disease, or tricuspid insufficiency subgroups. Intensive care unit length of stay was longer (P < .001), and there were more packed red blood cell transfusions in the pulmonary artery catheterization group (P < .001); however, postoperative outcomes were otherwise similar, including stroke, sepsis, and new renal failure (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that pulmonary artery catheterization may have limited benefit in cardiac surgery.