Patient‐ and Process‐Related Contributors to the Underuse of Aortic Valve Replacement and Subsequent Mortality in Ambulatory Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis

Laura D. Flannery, Muhammad Etiwy, Alexander Camacho, Ran Liu, Nilay K. Patel, Arpi Tavil‐Shatelyan, V. Tanguturi, J. Dal-Bianco, E. Yucel, R. Sakhuja, A. Jassar, N. Langer, I. Inglessis, J. Passeri, J. Hung, S. Elmariah
{"title":"Patient‐ and Process‐Related Contributors to the Underuse of Aortic Valve Replacement and Subsequent Mortality in Ambulatory Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis","authors":"Laura D. Flannery, Muhammad Etiwy, Alexander Camacho, Ran Liu, Nilay K. Patel, Arpi Tavil‐Shatelyan, V. Tanguturi, J. Dal-Bianco, E. Yucel, R. Sakhuja, A. Jassar, N. Langer, I. Inglessis, J. Passeri, J. Hung, S. Elmariah","doi":"10.1161/JAHA.121.025065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Many patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and an indication for aortic valve replacement (AVR) do not undergo treatment. The reasons for this have not been well studied in the transcatheter AVR era. We sought to determine how patient‐ and process‐specific factors affected AVR use in patients with severe AS. Methods and Results We identified ambulatory patients from 2016 to 2018 demonstrating severe AS, defined by aortic valve area ≤1.0 cm2. Propensity scoring analysis with inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to evaluate associations between predictors and the odds of undergoing AVR at 365 days and subsequent mortality at 730 days. Of 324 patients with an indication for AVR (79.3±9.7 years, 57.4% men), 140 patients (43.2%) did not undergo AVR. The odds of AVR were reduced in patients aged >90 years (odds ratio [OR], 0.24 [95% CI, 0.08–0.69]; P=0.01), greater comorbid conditions (OR, 0.88 per 1‐point increase in Combined Comorbidity Index [95% CI, 0.79–0.97]; P=0.01), low‐flow, low‐gradient AS with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (OR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.06–0.21]), and low‐gradient AS with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (OR, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.08–0.40]) and were increased if the transthoracic echocardiogram ordering provider was a cardiologist (OR, 2.46 [95% CI, 1.38–4.38]). Patients who underwent AVR gained an average of 85.8 days of life (95% CI, 40.9–130.6) at 730 days. Conclusions The proportion of ambulatory patients with severe AS and an indication for AVR who do not receive AVR remains significant. Efforts are needed to maximize the recognition of severe AS, especially low‐gradient subtypes, and to encourage patient referral to multidisciplinary heart valve teams.","PeriodicalId":17189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.121.025065","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background Many patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and an indication for aortic valve replacement (AVR) do not undergo treatment. The reasons for this have not been well studied in the transcatheter AVR era. We sought to determine how patient‐ and process‐specific factors affected AVR use in patients with severe AS. Methods and Results We identified ambulatory patients from 2016 to 2018 demonstrating severe AS, defined by aortic valve area ≤1.0 cm2. Propensity scoring analysis with inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to evaluate associations between predictors and the odds of undergoing AVR at 365 days and subsequent mortality at 730 days. Of 324 patients with an indication for AVR (79.3±9.7 years, 57.4% men), 140 patients (43.2%) did not undergo AVR. The odds of AVR were reduced in patients aged >90 years (odds ratio [OR], 0.24 [95% CI, 0.08–0.69]; P=0.01), greater comorbid conditions (OR, 0.88 per 1‐point increase in Combined Comorbidity Index [95% CI, 0.79–0.97]; P=0.01), low‐flow, low‐gradient AS with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (OR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.06–0.21]), and low‐gradient AS with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (OR, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.08–0.40]) and were increased if the transthoracic echocardiogram ordering provider was a cardiologist (OR, 2.46 [95% CI, 1.38–4.38]). Patients who underwent AVR gained an average of 85.8 days of life (95% CI, 40.9–130.6) at 730 days. Conclusions The proportion of ambulatory patients with severe AS and an indication for AVR who do not receive AVR remains significant. Efforts are needed to maximize the recognition of severe AS, especially low‐gradient subtypes, and to encourage patient referral to multidisciplinary heart valve teams.
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
严重主动脉瓣狭窄门诊患者主动脉瓣置换术使用不足及随后死亡率的患者和手术过程相关因素
背景:许多有严重主动脉瓣狭窄(AS)和主动脉瓣置换术(AVR)指征的患者不接受治疗。其原因在经导管AVR时代还没有得到很好的研究。我们试图确定患者和过程特异性因素如何影响严重AS患者使用AVR。方法和结果我们选取了2016年至2018年表现为严重AS的门诊患者,其定义为主动脉瓣面积≤1.0 cm2。使用治疗加权逆概率的倾向评分分析来评估预测因素与365天AVR和730天死亡率之间的关系。在324例有AVR指征的患者中(79.3±9.7岁,男性占57.4%),140例(43.2%)患者未行AVR。0 ~ 90岁患者AVR发生率降低(比值比[OR], 0.24 [95% CI, 0.08 ~ 0.69];P=0.01),更多的合并症(合并合并症指数每增加1个点,OR为0.88 [95% CI, 0.79-0.97];P=0.01),低流量,低梯度AS并保留左心室射血分数(OR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.06-0.21]),低梯度AS并降低左心室射血分数(OR, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.08-0.40]),如果经胸超声心动图排序提供者是心脏病专家(OR, 2.46 [95% CI, 1.38-4.38]),则增加。接受AVR治疗的患者在730天的平均寿命增加了85.8天(95% CI, 40.9-130.6)。结论有严重AS和AVR指征的非卧床患者未接受AVR治疗的比例仍然显著。需要努力最大限度地识别严重AS,特别是低梯度亚型,并鼓励患者转诊到多学科心脏瓣膜团队。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Predictors of Survival in Patients With Ischemic Stroke and Active Cancer: A Prospective, Multicenter, Observational Study Treatment of Slow‐Flow After Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Flow‐Mediated Hyperemia: The Randomized RAIN‐FLOW Study Predicting Arterial Thrombotic Events Following Peripheral Revascularization Using Objective Viscoelastic Data Safety of Catheter Ablation Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Cardiac Amyloidosis Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With and Without Resheathing and Repositioning: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
×
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:604180095
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