经导管主动脉瓣置换术后假体与患者不匹配的预测和长期临床结果:SWEDEHEART 研究。

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS American heart journal Pub Date : 2024-07-18 DOI:10.1016/j.ahj.2024.07.009
Emma Ellfors MD , Michael Dismorr MD, PhD , Andreas Rück MD, PhD , Magnus Settergren MD, PhD , Ulrik Sartipy MD, PhD , Natalie Glaser MD, PhD
{"title":"经导管主动脉瓣置换术后假体与患者不匹配的预测和长期临床结果:SWEDEHEART 研究。","authors":"Emma Ellfors MD ,&nbsp;Michael Dismorr MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Andreas Rück MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Magnus Settergren MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Ulrik Sartipy MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Natalie Glaser MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.ahj.2024.07.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The impact of prosthesis–patient mismatch (PPM) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is uncertain. This study was performed to investigate the risk of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and aortic valve reintervention in patients with and without predicted PPM after TAVR.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This nationwide, population-based cohort study included all patients who underwent transfemoral primary TAVR in Sweden from 2008 to 2022 in the SWEDEHEART register. PPM was defined according to published effective orifice areas for each valve model and size. The patients were divided into those with and without PPM. Additional baseline characteristics and outcome data were obtained from other national health data registers. Regression standardization was used to adjust for intergroup differences.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 8485 patients, 7879 (93%) had no PPM and 606 (7%) had PPM. The crude cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality at 1, 5, and 10 years in patients with versus without PPM was 7% versus 9%, 40% versus 44%, and 80% versus 85%, respectively. After regression standardization, there was no between-group difference in long-term mortality, and the absolute difference at 10 years was 1.5% (95% confidence interval, −2.9%-6.0%). The mean follow-up was 3.0 years (maximum, 14 years). There was no difference in the risk of heart failure hospitalization or aortic valve reintervention.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The risk of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, or aortic valve reintervention was not higher in patients with than without predicted PPM following TAVR. Furthermore, PPM was present in only 7% of patients, and severe PPM was almost nonexistent.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7868,"journal":{"name":"American heart journal","volume":"276 ","pages":"Pages 70-82"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002870324001753/pdfft?md5=bb2ac12291f41d65005fc92a68449454&pid=1-s2.0-S0002870324001753-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Predicted prosthesis–patient mismatch and long-term clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A SWEDEHEART study\",\"authors\":\"Emma Ellfors MD ,&nbsp;Michael Dismorr MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Andreas Rück MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Magnus Settergren MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Ulrik Sartipy MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Natalie Glaser MD, PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ahj.2024.07.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The impact of prosthesis–patient mismatch (PPM) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is uncertain. This study was performed to investigate the risk of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and aortic valve reintervention in patients with and without predicted PPM after TAVR.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This nationwide, population-based cohort study included all patients who underwent transfemoral primary TAVR in Sweden from 2008 to 2022 in the SWEDEHEART register. PPM was defined according to published effective orifice areas for each valve model and size. The patients were divided into those with and without PPM. Additional baseline characteristics and outcome data were obtained from other national health data registers. Regression standardization was used to adjust for intergroup differences.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 8485 patients, 7879 (93%) had no PPM and 606 (7%) had PPM. The crude cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality at 1, 5, and 10 years in patients with versus without PPM was 7% versus 9%, 40% versus 44%, and 80% versus 85%, respectively. After regression standardization, there was no between-group difference in long-term mortality, and the absolute difference at 10 years was 1.5% (95% confidence interval, −2.9%-6.0%). The mean follow-up was 3.0 years (maximum, 14 years). There was no difference in the risk of heart failure hospitalization or aortic valve reintervention.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The risk of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, or aortic valve reintervention was not higher in patients with than without predicted PPM following TAVR. Furthermore, PPM was present in only 7% of patients, and severe PPM was almost nonexistent.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7868,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American heart journal\",\"volume\":\"276 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 70-82\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002870324001753/pdfft?md5=bb2ac12291f41d65005fc92a68449454&pid=1-s2.0-S0002870324001753-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American heart journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002870324001753\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American heart journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002870324001753","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)后假体与患者不匹配(PPM)的影响尚不确定。本研究旨在调查经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)后有和没有预测到 PPM 的患者的全因死亡率、心衰住院率和主动脉瓣再介入风险:这项基于人群的全国性队列研究纳入了SWEDEHEART登记册中2008年至2022年期间在瑞典接受经股动脉初级TAVR的所有患者。根据已公布的每种瓣膜型号和尺寸的有效孔面积来定义PPM。患者分为有 PPM 和无 PPM 两种。其他基线特征和结果数据来自其他国家的健康数据登记。采用回归标准化方法调整组间差异:在 8485 名患者中,7879 人(93%)没有 PPM,606 人(7%)有 PPM。有 PPM 和没有 PPM 的患者在 1 年、5 年和 10 年的全因死亡率的粗累计发生率分别为 7% 对 9%、40% 对 44% 和 80% 对 85%。回归标准化后,长期死亡率没有组间差异,10 年的绝对差异为 1.5%(95% 置信区间,-2.9%-6.0%)。平均随访时间为 3.0 年(最长 14 年)。心衰住院或主动脉瓣再介入的风险没有差异:结论:TAVR术后有预测PPM的患者与无预测PPM的患者相比,全因死亡、心衰住院或主动脉瓣再介入的风险并不高。此外,只有7%的患者存在PPM,而且几乎不存在严重的PPM。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Predicted prosthesis–patient mismatch and long-term clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A SWEDEHEART study

Background

The impact of prosthesis–patient mismatch (PPM) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is uncertain. This study was performed to investigate the risk of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and aortic valve reintervention in patients with and without predicted PPM after TAVR.

Methods

This nationwide, population-based cohort study included all patients who underwent transfemoral primary TAVR in Sweden from 2008 to 2022 in the SWEDEHEART register. PPM was defined according to published effective orifice areas for each valve model and size. The patients were divided into those with and without PPM. Additional baseline characteristics and outcome data were obtained from other national health data registers. Regression standardization was used to adjust for intergroup differences.

Results

Of 8485 patients, 7879 (93%) had no PPM and 606 (7%) had PPM. The crude cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality at 1, 5, and 10 years in patients with versus without PPM was 7% versus 9%, 40% versus 44%, and 80% versus 85%, respectively. After regression standardization, there was no between-group difference in long-term mortality, and the absolute difference at 10 years was 1.5% (95% confidence interval, −2.9%-6.0%). The mean follow-up was 3.0 years (maximum, 14 years). There was no difference in the risk of heart failure hospitalization or aortic valve reintervention.

Conclusions

The risk of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, or aortic valve reintervention was not higher in patients with than without predicted PPM following TAVR. Furthermore, PPM was present in only 7% of patients, and severe PPM was almost nonexistent.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American heart journal
American heart journal 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
2.10%
发文量
214
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: The American Heart Journal will consider for publication suitable articles on topics pertaining to the broad discipline of cardiovascular disease. Our goal is to provide the reader primary investigation, scholarly review, and opinion concerning the practice of cardiovascular medicine. We especially encourage submission of 3 types of reports that are not frequently seen in cardiovascular journals: negative clinical studies, reports on study designs, and studies involving the organization of medical care. The Journal does not accept individual case reports or original articles involving bench laboratory or animal research.
期刊最新文献
All-cause mortality and death by aortic dissection in women with Turner syndrome: a national clinical cohort study. The Federal Trade Commission Investigation of Pharmaceutical Benefit Managers. Prognosis of patients with non-specific electrocardiogram findings in a Tanzanian Emergency Department. Effect of apixaban versus vitamin K antagonist and aspirin versus placebo on days alive and out of hospital: An analysis from AUGUSTUS Chest pain and coronary artery disease in cardiac amyloidosis: Prevalence, mechanisms, and clinical implications
×
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