经导管主动脉瓣植入脑栓塞保护的部位变异性及其与结果的关系

IF 1.4 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Structural Heart Pub Date : 2023-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.shj.2023.100202
Aamer Ubaid MD , Kevin F. Kennedy MS , Adnan K. Chhatriwalla MD , John T. Saxon MD , Anthony Hart MD , Keith B. Allen MD , Corinne Aberle MD , Islam Shatla MD , Abdelrhman Abumoawad MD , Satya Preetham Gunta MD , David Skolnick MD , Chetan P. Huded MD, MSc
{"title":"经导管主动脉瓣植入脑栓塞保护的部位变异性及其与结果的关系","authors":"Aamer Ubaid MD ,&nbsp;Kevin F. Kennedy MS ,&nbsp;Adnan K. Chhatriwalla MD ,&nbsp;John T. Saxon MD ,&nbsp;Anthony Hart MD ,&nbsp;Keith B. Allen MD ,&nbsp;Corinne Aberle MD ,&nbsp;Islam Shatla MD ,&nbsp;Abdelrhman Abumoawad MD ,&nbsp;Satya Preetham Gunta MD ,&nbsp;David Skolnick MD ,&nbsp;Chetan P. Huded MD, MSc","doi":"10.1016/j.shj.2023.100202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The effectiveness of cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPD) in mitigating stroke after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains uncertain, and therefore CEPD may be utilized differently across US hospitals. This study aims to characterize the hospital-level pattern of CEPD use during TAVI in the US and its association with outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Patients treated with nontransapical TAVI in the 2019 Nationwide Readmissions Database were included. Hospitals were categorized as CEPD non-users and CEPD users. The following outcomes were compared: the composite of in-hospital stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), in-hospital ischemic stroke, death, and cost of hospitalization. Logistic regression models were used for risk adjustment of clinical outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 41,822 TAVI encounters, CEPD was used in 10.6% (n = 4422). Out of 392 hospitals, 65.8% were CEPD non-user hospitals and 34.2% were CEPD users. No difference was observed between CEPD non-users and CEPD users in the risk of in-hospital stroke or TIA (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 0.99 [0.86-1.15]), ischemic stroke (adjusted OR = 1.00 [0.85-1.18]), or in-hospital death (adjusted OR = 0.86 [0.71-1.03]). The cost of hospitalization was lower in CEPD non-users.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Two-thirds of hospitals in the US do not use CEPD for TAVI, and no significant difference was observed in neurologic outcomes among patients treated at CEPD non-user and CEPD user hospitals.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36053,"journal":{"name":"Structural Heart","volume":"7 6","pages":"Article 100202"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2474870623000842/pdfft?md5=76c80c139327b614f604854d93b828aa&pid=1-s2.0-S2474870623000842-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Site Variability in Cerebral Embolic Protection for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation and Association With Outcomes\",\"authors\":\"Aamer Ubaid MD ,&nbsp;Kevin F. Kennedy MS ,&nbsp;Adnan K. Chhatriwalla MD ,&nbsp;John T. Saxon MD ,&nbsp;Anthony Hart MD ,&nbsp;Keith B. Allen MD ,&nbsp;Corinne Aberle MD ,&nbsp;Islam Shatla MD ,&nbsp;Abdelrhman Abumoawad MD ,&nbsp;Satya Preetham Gunta MD ,&nbsp;David Skolnick MD ,&nbsp;Chetan P. Huded MD, MSc\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.shj.2023.100202\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The effectiveness of cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPD) in mitigating stroke after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains uncertain, and therefore CEPD may be utilized differently across US hospitals. This study aims to characterize the hospital-level pattern of CEPD use during TAVI in the US and its association with outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Patients treated with nontransapical TAVI in the 2019 Nationwide Readmissions Database were included. Hospitals were categorized as CEPD non-users and CEPD users. The following outcomes were compared: the composite of in-hospital stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), in-hospital ischemic stroke, death, and cost of hospitalization. Logistic regression models were used for risk adjustment of clinical outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 41,822 TAVI encounters, CEPD was used in 10.6% (n = 4422). Out of 392 hospitals, 65.8% were CEPD non-user hospitals and 34.2% were CEPD users. No difference was observed between CEPD non-users and CEPD users in the risk of in-hospital stroke or TIA (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 0.99 [0.86-1.15]), ischemic stroke (adjusted OR = 1.00 [0.85-1.18]), or in-hospital death (adjusted OR = 0.86 [0.71-1.03]). The cost of hospitalization was lower in CEPD non-users.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Two-thirds of hospitals in the US do not use CEPD for TAVI, and no significant difference was observed in neurologic outcomes among patients treated at CEPD non-user and CEPD user hospitals.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36053,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Structural Heart\",\"volume\":\"7 6\",\"pages\":\"Article 100202\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2474870623000842/pdfft?md5=76c80c139327b614f604854d93b828aa&pid=1-s2.0-S2474870623000842-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Structural Heart\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2474870623000842\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Structural Heart","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2474870623000842","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:脑栓塞保护装置(CEPD)在经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)后减轻卒中的有效性仍不确定,因此美国各医院可能使用不同的CEPD。本研究旨在描述美国TAVI期间医院水平的CEPD使用模式及其与结果的关系。方法纳入2019年全国再入院数据库中接受非经根尖TAVI治疗的患者。医院被分为非CEPD使用者和CEPD使用者。比较以下结果:院内卒中或短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)的综合、院内缺血性卒中、死亡和住院费用。采用Logistic回归模型对临床结果进行风险调整。结果在41822例TAVI患者中,10.6% (n = 4422)采用CEPD。在392间医院中,65.8%为CEPD非使用医院,34.2%为CEPD使用医院。在院内卒中或TIA(校正比值比(or) = 0.99[0.86-1.15])、缺血性卒中(校正比值比(or) = 1.00[0.85-1.18])、院内死亡(校正比值比= 0.86[0.71-1.03])的风险方面,未使用CEPD的患者与使用CEPD的患者之间无差异。不使用CEPD的患者住院费用较低。结论美国三分之二的医院不使用CEPD治疗TAVI,在不使用CEPD和使用CEPD的医院治疗的患者的神经系统结局无显著差异。
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
Site Variability in Cerebral Embolic Protection for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation and Association With Outcomes

Background

The effectiveness of cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPD) in mitigating stroke after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains uncertain, and therefore CEPD may be utilized differently across US hospitals. This study aims to characterize the hospital-level pattern of CEPD use during TAVI in the US and its association with outcomes.

Methods

Patients treated with nontransapical TAVI in the 2019 Nationwide Readmissions Database were included. Hospitals were categorized as CEPD non-users and CEPD users. The following outcomes were compared: the composite of in-hospital stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), in-hospital ischemic stroke, death, and cost of hospitalization. Logistic regression models were used for risk adjustment of clinical outcomes.

Results

Of 41,822 TAVI encounters, CEPD was used in 10.6% (n = 4422). Out of 392 hospitals, 65.8% were CEPD non-user hospitals and 34.2% were CEPD users. No difference was observed between CEPD non-users and CEPD users in the risk of in-hospital stroke or TIA (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 0.99 [0.86-1.15]), ischemic stroke (adjusted OR = 1.00 [0.85-1.18]), or in-hospital death (adjusted OR = 0.86 [0.71-1.03]). The cost of hospitalization was lower in CEPD non-users.

Conclusions

Two-thirds of hospitals in the US do not use CEPD for TAVI, and no significant difference was observed in neurologic outcomes among patients treated at CEPD non-user and CEPD user hospitals.

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
Structural Heart
Structural Heart Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
81
期刊最新文献
Tricuspid Regurgitation in the Setting of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Supra-Annular Versus Intra-Annular Self-Expanding Valves in Small Aortic Annulus: A Propensity Score-Matched Study Targeting the Future: Three-Dimensional Imaging for Precise Guidance of the Transseptal Puncture Can Variation in Costs for Cardiovascular Procedures Be Attributed to Inefficiency in Care Delivery? Challenges in Causality, Data Availability, and the Need for Price Transparency Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: Expanding Indications and New Developments
×
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