Preoperative atrial fibrillation/flutter impact on risk-adjusted repeat aortic intervention patients

S. Novotny, Julia Dokko, Xiaoyue Zhang, So Agha, Ashutosh Yaligar, Natalie K. Kolba, Vineet Tummala, P. Parikh, A. Pryor, H. Tannous, A. L. Shroyer, Thomas Bilfinger
{"title":"Preoperative atrial fibrillation/flutter impact on risk-adjusted repeat aortic intervention patients","authors":"S. Novotny, Julia Dokko, Xiaoyue Zhang, So Agha, Ashutosh Yaligar, Natalie K. Kolba, Vineet Tummala, P. Parikh, A. Pryor, H. Tannous, A. L. Shroyer, Thomas Bilfinger","doi":"10.20517/2574-1209.2021.139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: Impacts of pre-operative atrial fibrillation or flutter (AF/AFL) upon repeat aortic valve replacement (r-AVR) patients’ risk-adjusted short-term outcomes is unknown. Methods: From 2005-2018, New York State AF/AFL versus non-AF/AFL adults’ risk-adjusted r-AVR outcomes were compared. Primary endpoints included the Society of Thoracic Surgeons’ 30-day operative mortality or major morbidity (MM) composite and 30-day readmission (READMIT); the MM sub-components were secondary endpoints. Multivariable logistic regression models evaluated AF/AFL impact upon these endpoints while holding other factors constant. Results: Of 36,783 adults initially undergoing aortic valve replacement, 334 subsequently underwent r-AVR. Within this r-AVR group, 42.4% of repeat surgical (r-SAVR) patients had AF/AFL; 50.4% of repeat transcatheter (viv-TAVR) patients had AF/AFL. R-SAVR AF/AFL patients were older and had more comorbidities than those without AF/AFL. Viv-TAVR AF/AFL patients were similar to those without AF/AFL except for lower rates of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Comparing risk-adjusted r-AVR outcomes, AF/AFL did not impact MM [odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.23, 0.66-2.28, P = 0.512] or READMIT (OR, 95% CI: 1.15, 0.60-2.19, P = 0.681). Black race (OR, 95% CI: 2.89, 1.01-8.32, P = 0.049) and Elixhauser mortality score (OR, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.04-1.10, P < 0.0001) predicted MM risk. Cerebrovascular disease (OR, 95% CI: 2.54, 1.23-5.25, P = 0.012) predicted READMIT risk, while viv-TAVR was protective compared to r-SAVR (OR, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.21-0.91, P = 0.027). Conclusion: AF/AFL was not associated with risk-adjusted short-term r-AVR outcomes. Black race, Elixhauser mortality score, and cerebrovascular disease predicted adverse outcomes.","PeriodicalId":75299,"journal":{"name":"Vessel plus","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vessel plus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20517/2574-1209.2021.139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Aim: Impacts of pre-operative atrial fibrillation or flutter (AF/AFL) upon repeat aortic valve replacement (r-AVR) patients’ risk-adjusted short-term outcomes is unknown. Methods: From 2005-2018, New York State AF/AFL versus non-AF/AFL adults’ risk-adjusted r-AVR outcomes were compared. Primary endpoints included the Society of Thoracic Surgeons’ 30-day operative mortality or major morbidity (MM) composite and 30-day readmission (READMIT); the MM sub-components were secondary endpoints. Multivariable logistic regression models evaluated AF/AFL impact upon these endpoints while holding other factors constant. Results: Of 36,783 adults initially undergoing aortic valve replacement, 334 subsequently underwent r-AVR. Within this r-AVR group, 42.4% of repeat surgical (r-SAVR) patients had AF/AFL; 50.4% of repeat transcatheter (viv-TAVR) patients had AF/AFL. R-SAVR AF/AFL patients were older and had more comorbidities than those without AF/AFL. Viv-TAVR AF/AFL patients were similar to those without AF/AFL except for lower rates of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Comparing risk-adjusted r-AVR outcomes, AF/AFL did not impact MM [odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.23, 0.66-2.28, P = 0.512] or READMIT (OR, 95% CI: 1.15, 0.60-2.19, P = 0.681). Black race (OR, 95% CI: 2.89, 1.01-8.32, P = 0.049) and Elixhauser mortality score (OR, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.04-1.10, P < 0.0001) predicted MM risk. Cerebrovascular disease (OR, 95% CI: 2.54, 1.23-5.25, P = 0.012) predicted READMIT risk, while viv-TAVR was protective compared to r-SAVR (OR, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.21-0.91, P = 0.027). Conclusion: AF/AFL was not associated with risk-adjusted short-term r-AVR outcomes. Black race, Elixhauser mortality score, and cerebrovascular disease predicted adverse outcomes.
术前房颤/扑动对经风险调整的重复主动脉介入治疗患者的影响
目的:术前心房颤动或扑动(AF/AFL)对重复主动脉瓣置换术(r-AVR)患者经风险调整的短期预后的影响尚不清楚。方法:比较2005-2018年纽约州AF/AFL与非AF/AFL成人经风险调整的r-AVR结局。主要终点包括胸外科学会30天手术死亡率或主要发病率(MM)和30天再入院率(READMIT);MM子成分为次要终点。多变量逻辑回归模型在保持其他因素不变的情况下评估AF/AFL对这些终点的影响。结果:36783名成年人最初接受主动脉瓣置换术,334人随后接受了r-AVR。在r-AVR组中,42.4%的重复手术(r-SAVR)患者患有AF/AFL;50.4%的重复经导管(viv-TAVR)患者有AF/AFL。R-SAVR AF/AFL患者比无AF/AFL患者年龄更大,合并症更多。Viv-TAVR AF/AFL患者与无AF/AFL患者相似,但慢性阻塞性肺疾病的发生率较低。比较风险调整后的r-AVR结果,AF/AFL不影响MM[比值比(OR), 95%可信区间(CI): 1.23, 0.66-2.28, P = 0.512]或READMIT (OR, 95% CI: 1.15, 0.60-2.19, P = 0.681)。黑人(OR, 95% CI: 2.89, 1.01-8.32, P = 0.049)和Elixhauser死亡率评分(OR, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.04-1.10, P < 0.0001)预测MM风险。脑血管疾病(OR, 95% CI: 2.54, 1.23-5.25, P = 0.012)预测READMIT风险,而与r-SAVR相比,viv-TAVR具有保护作用(OR, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.21-0.91, P = 0.027)。结论:AF/AFL与经风险调整的短期r-AVR结果无关。黑人种族、Elixhauser死亡率评分和脑血管疾病预测不良结局。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信