Deutsches Arzteblatt international最新文献

Background: The standard aortic valve replacement operations in young patients are bioprosthetic or mechanical aortic valve replacement. In this study, we present the long-term results of the Ross operation in young patients.

Methods: The Ross operation with root replacement was performed on 795 patients between 1995 and 2020. The endpoints were overall survival, re-operation/reintervention rates on the autograft and homograft/RV-PA conduit (RV, right ventricle; PA, pulmonary artery), and the occurrence of serious adverse events.

Results: 795 patients (75% male, 25% female; mean age 43 ± 14 years) underwent the Ross operation with root replacement. The 30-day mortality was 1% (8 patients) with a 95% confidence interval of [0.48; 1.9]. The follow-up was 96 % complete and covered 9540 patient-years, with a mean follow-up time of 12 ± 7 years. The survival rates at 5, 10, 15 and 20 years were 97% [96; 98], 96% [93; 96], 92% [89; 94] and 86% [83; 90]. The rate of autograft survival without reoperation was 94% [92; 96] at 10 years and 80% [76; 85] at 20 years. The rate of homograft/RV-PA conduit survival without reoperation was 95% [93; 97] at 10 years and 85% [81; 90] at 20 years. There were 5 cases of hemorrhage, 14 of thromboembolic complications or apoplexy, and 19 of endocarditis.

Conclusion: The Ross operation with root replacement was associated with high survival rates over 25 years of follow-up. The rates of reoperation and reintervention, the morbidity and mortality, and the rate of endocarditis are low. The Ross operation is thus an effective surgical treatment option for young patients with aortic valve disease.

Background: The risk of persistent postoperative opioid use (PPOU) and its association with the type of surgery are still unclear in Germany.

Methods: We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study on the basis of claims data from BARMER, a statutory health insurance carrier in Germany. Opioid-naive adults who did not have cancer and who underwent inpatient surgery in 2018 were included in the study. The operations were divided into 103 categories. PPOU was defined as the prescribing of opioids between post - operative days 1 and 90 and also between postoperative days 91 and 180 after hospital discharge. Patient-associated risk factors in the 12 months before surgery were investigated.

Results: 203 327 patients were included. 1.4% had PPOU (95% confidence interval [1.4; 1.5]). There were major differences between operation groups: major amputations and orthopedic procedures carried the greatest risk for the development of PPOU. The type of surgery had a larger effect on the risk of PPOU than preexisting risk factors (explained variance 22.3% vs. 14.3%). Among such factors, alcohol abuse and preexisting treatment with antidepressant drugs were associated with the highest risk for PPOU (odds ratios [OR] 1.515 [1.277; 1.797] and 2.131 [1.943; 2.336]).

Conclusion: The incidence of PPOU in Germany is low (1.4%). The type of surgery plays an important role in its development.

Background: Observational epidemiological studies often yield different results on the same research question. In this article, we explain how this comes about.

Methods: In this review, which is based on publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed and the Web of Science, we use information from international publications, simulation studies on sampling error, and a quantitative bias analysis on fictitious data to demonstrate why the results of epidemiological studies are often uncertain, and why it is, therefore, generally necessary to perform more than one study on any particular question.

Results: Sampling errors, imprecise measurements, alternative but equally appropriate methods of data analysis, and features of the populations being studied are common reasons why studies on the same question can yield different results. Simulation studies are used to illustrate the fact that effect estimates such as relative risks or odds ratios can deviate markedly from the true value because of sampling error, i.e., by chance alone. Quantitative bias analysis is used to show how strongly effect estimates can be distorted by misclassification of exposures or outcomes. Finally, it is shown through illustrative examples that different but equally appropriate methods of data analysis can lead to divergent study results.

Conclusion: The above reasons why epidemiological study results can be heterogeneous are explained in this review. Quantitative bias analyses and sensitivity analyses with alternative data evaluation strategies can help explain divergent results on one and the same question.

Background: The treatment options for patients with progressive malignant tumors despite primary radiotherapy are often limited. In selected cases, re-irradiation can be offered. This article concerns the selection criteria and results of re-irradiation for certain types of cancer.

Methods: This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed, with particular attention to glio - blastoma, head and neck tumors, and prostatic carcinoma.

Results: The published studies of re-irradiation are few in number and often of limited methodological quality. For glioblastoma, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) found that adding re-irradiation to treatment with bevacizumab yielded no significant improvement in either median progression-free survival or median overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73; p = 0.05 and HR 0.98; p = 0.46, respec - tively). Re-irradiation is a treatment option for locoregional recurrences of head and neck tumors after primary radiotherapy, but it carries a risk of serious side effects. For unresectable recurrences of nasopharyngeal carcinoma, an RCT has shown that hyperfractionated re-irradiation is more effective than normofractionated re-irradiation (overall survival: HR 0.54, p = 0.014). For locally recurrent prostatic carcinoma after radiotherapy, re-irradiation can yield good oncologic outcomes with an acceptable level of urogenital and gastrointestinal side effects (5-year recurrence-free survival: stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), 58%; high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy, 77%; versus salvage prostatectomy, 72%). RCTs on this topic are lacking.

Conclusion: Re-irradiation is a treatment option for selected cancer patients. As the available scientific evidence is limited, multidisciplinary collaboration and participatory decision-making are particularly important.