冠状动脉旁路移植术中左心房阑尾截肢的围手术期效果。

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Clinical Research in Cardiology Pub Date : 2024-09-02 DOI:10.1007/s00392-024-02529-9
Mustafa Gerçek, Tomislav Skuljevic, Jochen Börgermann, Jan Gummert, Muhammed Gerçek
{"title":"冠状动脉旁路移植术中左心房阑尾截肢的围手术期效果。","authors":"Mustafa Gerçek, Tomislav Skuljevic, Jochen Börgermann, Jan Gummert, Muhammed Gerçek","doi":"10.1007/s00392-024-02529-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Left atrial appendage (LAA) amputation performed alongside cardiac surgery has become an increasingly established procedure to reduce stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation. As the recommendation levels for LAA amputation continue to rise, ample evidence assessing its perioperative safety and risk factors is of utmost interest.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2018 and 2021 at two high-volume centers were retrospectively included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups-the CABG and CABG + LAA groups-based on whether they underwent concomitant LAA amputation. Propensity score matching (PS matching) was applied to ensure comparability between the groups. The primary endpoint was defined as a composite outcome comprising of all-cause mortality, stroke, and reoperation. Secondary endpoints included the components of the primary endpoint, perioperative outcome parameters, transfusion rates, and laboratory parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3904 patients were included with 3038 and 866 in the CABG and CABG + LAA group, respectively. After PS matching each group consisted of 856 patients. The primary endpoint showed no significant differences between the CABG and CABG + LAA group (7.0% vs. 6.5% (OR 0.9 95% CI [0.64; 1.35], p = 0.70)). Similarly, there were no notable differences in the individual components of the composite endpoint: all-cause mortality (p = 0.84), stroke (p = 0.74), and reoperation (p = 0.50). Subgroup results did not show any relevant dissimilarity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The concomitant performance of LAA amputation is not associated with worse in-hospital outcomes, as measured by the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, and reoperation.</p>","PeriodicalId":10474,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Research in Cardiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perioperative outcome of left atrial appendage amputation in coronary artery bypass grafting.\",\"authors\":\"Mustafa Gerçek, Tomislav Skuljevic, Jochen Börgermann, Jan Gummert, Muhammed Gerçek\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00392-024-02529-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Left atrial appendage (LAA) amputation performed alongside cardiac surgery has become an increasingly established procedure to reduce stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation. As the recommendation levels for LAA amputation continue to rise, ample evidence assessing its perioperative safety and risk factors is of utmost interest.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2018 and 2021 at two high-volume centers were retrospectively included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups-the CABG and CABG + LAA groups-based on whether they underwent concomitant LAA amputation. Propensity score matching (PS matching) was applied to ensure comparability between the groups. The primary endpoint was defined as a composite outcome comprising of all-cause mortality, stroke, and reoperation. Secondary endpoints included the components of the primary endpoint, perioperative outcome parameters, transfusion rates, and laboratory parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3904 patients were included with 3038 and 866 in the CABG and CABG + LAA group, respectively. After PS matching each group consisted of 856 patients. The primary endpoint showed no significant differences between the CABG and CABG + LAA group (7.0% vs. 6.5% (OR 0.9 95% CI [0.64; 1.35], p = 0.70)). Similarly, there were no notable differences in the individual components of the composite endpoint: all-cause mortality (p = 0.84), stroke (p = 0.74), and reoperation (p = 0.50). Subgroup results did not show any relevant dissimilarity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The concomitant performance of LAA amputation is not associated with worse in-hospital outcomes, as measured by the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, and reoperation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10474,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Research in Cardiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Research in Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-024-02529-9\",\"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":"Clinical Research in Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-024-02529-9","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:与心脏手术同时进行的左心房阑尾(LAA)截除术已逐渐成为降低心房颤动患者卒中风险的一种成熟手术。随着对 LAA 截肢术的推荐水平不断提高,评估其围手术期安全性和风险因素的充分证据也引起了人们的极大兴趣:研究回顾性纳入了 2018 年至 2021 年期间在两个高容量中心接受孤立冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的所有患者。根据患者是否同时接受 LAA 截肢手术,将患者分为两组--CABG 组和 CABG + LAA 组。为确保两组间的可比性,采用了倾向评分匹配法(PS matching)。主要终点定义为由全因死亡率、中风和再次手术组成的综合结果。次要终点包括主要终点的组成部分、围手术期结果参数、输血率和实验室参数:共纳入 3904 名患者,其中 CABG 组和 CABG + LAA 组分别有 3038 名和 866 名患者。PS配对后,每组各有856名患者。主要终点在 CABG 组和 CABG + LAA 组之间无明显差异(7.0% vs. 6.5% (OR 0.9 95% CI [0.64; 1.35], p = 0.70))。同样,复合终点的各个组成部分:全因死亡率(p = 0.84)、中风(p = 0.74)和再次手术(p = 0.50)也没有明显差异。分组结果未显示任何相关差异:结论:根据全因死亡率、中风和再次手术的复合终点来衡量,同时进行 LAA 截肢与较差的院内预后无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Perioperative outcome of left atrial appendage amputation in coronary artery bypass grafting.

Background: Left atrial appendage (LAA) amputation performed alongside cardiac surgery has become an increasingly established procedure to reduce stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation. As the recommendation levels for LAA amputation continue to rise, ample evidence assessing its perioperative safety and risk factors is of utmost interest.

Methods: All patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2018 and 2021 at two high-volume centers were retrospectively included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups-the CABG and CABG + LAA groups-based on whether they underwent concomitant LAA amputation. Propensity score matching (PS matching) was applied to ensure comparability between the groups. The primary endpoint was defined as a composite outcome comprising of all-cause mortality, stroke, and reoperation. Secondary endpoints included the components of the primary endpoint, perioperative outcome parameters, transfusion rates, and laboratory parameters.

Results: A total of 3904 patients were included with 3038 and 866 in the CABG and CABG + LAA group, respectively. After PS matching each group consisted of 856 patients. The primary endpoint showed no significant differences between the CABG and CABG + LAA group (7.0% vs. 6.5% (OR 0.9 95% CI [0.64; 1.35], p = 0.70)). Similarly, there were no notable differences in the individual components of the composite endpoint: all-cause mortality (p = 0.84), stroke (p = 0.74), and reoperation (p = 0.50). Subgroup results did not show any relevant dissimilarity.

Conclusion: The concomitant performance of LAA amputation is not associated with worse in-hospital outcomes, as measured by the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, and reoperation.

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
Clinical Research in Cardiology
Clinical Research in Cardiology 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
140
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Research in Cardiology is an international journal for clinical cardiovascular research. It provides a forum for original and review articles as well as critical perspective articles. Articles are only accepted if they meet stringent scientific standards and have undergone peer review. The journal regularly receives articles from the field of clinical cardiology, angiology, as well as heart and vascular surgery. As the official journal of the German Cardiac Society, it gives a current and competent survey on the diagnosis and therapy of heart and vascular diseases.
期刊最新文献
ACEF score and lactate: lifeline predictors in endocarditis valve procedures: insights from a single-center study. Percutaneous aspiration for shortening time to blood cultures sterilization in right-sided infective endocarditis and vegetations. In-hospital bioimpedance-derived total body water predicts short-term cardiovascular mortality and re-hospitalizations in acute decompensated heart failure patients. Overlapping obstructive sleep apnea and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Influence of diabetes and obesity on ten-year outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting in the arterial revascularisation trial.
×
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