Global variation in the incidence of new-onset postoperative atrial fibrillation after cardiac and non-cardiac surgery: a systematic review

Daniel F Pardo, A. L. Shroyer, T. Bilfinger
{"title":"Global variation in the incidence of new-onset postoperative atrial fibrillation after cardiac and non-cardiac surgery: a systematic review","authors":"Daniel F Pardo, A. L. Shroyer, T. Bilfinger","doi":"10.20517/2574-1209.2021.146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: In the US, postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is the most common complication after cardiac surgery and a frequent complication after non-cardiac surgery, causing excess patient length of stay and costs. After a comprehensive review looking for validated statistically significant data sets, too few data, particularly from outside of the US and Europe, could be found to perform a conclusive analysis, but there is enough data for a well-informed, educated opinion. Methods: A systematic review analyzing 28 international and US studies of POAF hospital length of stay were identified; from this excess and % excess along with total patient length of stay were calculated, where excess patient length of stay is defined as the difference in post-operative stay between POAF and non-POAF patients in days. Geographic variabilities were calculated using chi-square analyses for US regions and international comparisons for a variety of surgical procedures with POAF. Results: Geographic variability analyses when corrected for total hospital stay showed a 325% longer excess patient length of stay (days) in the US vs. Europe (3.4 days vs. 0.8 days) for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). It also showed a 27.3% longer excess patient length of stay (days) in the US vs. Europe (4.2 days vs. 3.3 days) for lung resections. These were both statistically significant at P < 0.001. Conclusion: There appear to be substantial variations in POAF-related care practices worldwide. In all practice settings, POAF causes increased patient length of stay. Europeans appear to do better than the US in POAF patients’ length of stay for CABG but not for lung resections. POAF is a worldwide problem where international cooperation in research and development of best practice guidelines would be particularly fruitful.","PeriodicalId":75299,"journal":{"name":"Vessel plus","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vessel plus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20517/2574-1209.2021.146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Aim: In the US, postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is the most common complication after cardiac surgery and a frequent complication after non-cardiac surgery, causing excess patient length of stay and costs. After a comprehensive review looking for validated statistically significant data sets, too few data, particularly from outside of the US and Europe, could be found to perform a conclusive analysis, but there is enough data for a well-informed, educated opinion. Methods: A systematic review analyzing 28 international and US studies of POAF hospital length of stay were identified; from this excess and % excess along with total patient length of stay were calculated, where excess patient length of stay is defined as the difference in post-operative stay between POAF and non-POAF patients in days. Geographic variabilities were calculated using chi-square analyses for US regions and international comparisons for a variety of surgical procedures with POAF. Results: Geographic variability analyses when corrected for total hospital stay showed a 325% longer excess patient length of stay (days) in the US vs. Europe (3.4 days vs. 0.8 days) for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). It also showed a 27.3% longer excess patient length of stay (days) in the US vs. Europe (4.2 days vs. 3.3 days) for lung resections. These were both statistically significant at P < 0.001. Conclusion: There appear to be substantial variations in POAF-related care practices worldwide. In all practice settings, POAF causes increased patient length of stay. Europeans appear to do better than the US in POAF patients’ length of stay for CABG but not for lung resections. POAF is a worldwide problem where international cooperation in research and development of best practice guidelines would be particularly fruitful.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
心脏和非心脏手术后新发房颤发生率的全球变化:系统回顾
目的:在美国,术后心房颤动(POAF)是心脏手术后最常见的并发症,也是非心脏手术后最常见的并发症,导致患者住院时间延长和费用增加。经过全面审查,寻找经过验证的统计显著数据集后,可以找到的数据太少,特别是来自美国和欧洲以外的数据,无法进行结论性分析,但有足够的数据可以形成一个知情的、受过教育的观点。方法:系统回顾分析28项国际和美国关于POAF住院时间的研究;从这一超额和%超额以及患者总住院时间进行计算,其中超额住院时间定义为POAF和非POAF患者术后住院天数的差异。使用卡方分析计算美国地区的地理变异,并对各种POAF手术进行国际比较。结果:对总住院时间进行校正后的地理变异性分析显示,美国冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的多余患者住院时间(天)比欧洲(3.4天对0.8天)长325%。它还显示,在美国,肺切除术患者的额外住院时间(天)比欧洲(4.2天对3.3天)长27.3%。P < 0.001,均有统计学意义。结论:在世界范围内,与poaf相关的护理实践似乎存在实质性差异。在所有的实践设置中,POAF导致患者住院时间增加。在POAF患者CABG的住院时间方面,欧洲人似乎比美国人做得好,但在肺切除术方面则不然。POAF是一个世界性的问题,在研究和制定最佳做法准则方面的国际合作将特别富有成果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Echocardiographic cardiac views classification using whale optimization and weighted support vector machine Association of inflammation, oxidative stress, and deteriorated cognitive functions in patients after cardiac surgery Role of inflammation in the progression of diabetic kidney disease Multivessel disease in patient with acute myocardial infarction: current treatment strategies and future perspectives Editorial review: guidance for future atrial fibrillation research
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1