猪生物瓣膜与心包生物瓣膜在接受孤立主动脉瓣置换术的老年患者中的长期生存优势:一项为期 32 年的研究。

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
George Ebra, Ernest A Traad, Paul A Kurlansky
{"title":"猪生物瓣膜与心包生物瓣膜在接受孤立主动脉瓣置换术的老年患者中的长期生存优势:一项为期 32 年的研究。","authors":"George Ebra, Ernest A Traad, Paul A Kurlansky","doi":"10.59958/hsf.6917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The elderly population is growing at an unprecedented rate. Aortic valve disease increases with age. Bioprostheses are the valves of choice for older patients; however, the optimal tissue valve remains undetermined. The purpose of this investigation was to perform a life-of-patient survival comparison of the prototypical porcine and pericardial prostheses in elderly patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study population (N = 1480) consisted of patients 65 years of age and older who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement from 1990 through 2005 with a Carpentier-Edwards Porcine (n = 650) or Pericardial (n = 830) bioprosthesis. Propensity score-matched groups were created.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Valve selection was not associated with operative mortality. Survival estimates at 10 years were better for Pericardial (41.8%; 95% CI: 37.9 to 45.7) than Porcine (32.6%; 95% CI: 28.8 to 36.3); and 5.2% (95% CI: 3.2 to 7.1) versus 2.0%; (95% CI: 0.8 to 3.2) at 20 years (p < 0.001). E-value analysis found minimal influence of unknown study confounders. Factors associated with long-term mortality were porcine valve (p < 0.001), age (p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (p < 0.001), preop renal insufficiency (p < 0.001), peripheral artery disease (p = 0.011), congestive heart failure (p = 0.003), New York Heart Association Class III or IV (p = 0.004), surgical history-reoperation (p = 0.012), transient ischemic attack (p = 0.009), prolonged ventilation (p = 0.010), postop renal insufficiency (p < 0.001), and atrial fibrillation (p = 0.009). The indexed Effective Orifice Area (EOAi) was assessed and did not influence observed long-term survival differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This unusual lifetime study provided substantial evidence for the superiority of the pericardial over the porcine bioprosthesis in the aortic position in elderly patients. It demonstrated enhanced long-term survival benefits for elderly patients without any increase in perioperative mortality. It is intended to inform future investigation into aortic valve design.</p>","PeriodicalId":51056,"journal":{"name":"Heart Surgery Forum","volume":"26 6","pages":"E869-E879"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Long-Term Survival Benefits of Porcine versus Pericardial Bioprostheses in Elderly Patients Undergoing Isolated Aortic Valve Replacement: A 32-Year Study.\",\"authors\":\"George Ebra, Ernest A Traad, Paul A Kurlansky\",\"doi\":\"10.59958/hsf.6917\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The elderly population is growing at an unprecedented rate. Aortic valve disease increases with age. Bioprostheses are the valves of choice for older patients; however, the optimal tissue valve remains undetermined. The purpose of this investigation was to perform a life-of-patient survival comparison of the prototypical porcine and pericardial prostheses in elderly patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study population (N = 1480) consisted of patients 65 years of age and older who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement from 1990 through 2005 with a Carpentier-Edwards Porcine (n = 650) or Pericardial (n = 830) bioprosthesis. Propensity score-matched groups were created.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Valve selection was not associated with operative mortality. Survival estimates at 10 years were better for Pericardial (41.8%; 95% CI: 37.9 to 45.7) than Porcine (32.6%; 95% CI: 28.8 to 36.3); and 5.2% (95% CI: 3.2 to 7.1) versus 2.0%; (95% CI: 0.8 to 3.2) at 20 years (p < 0.001). E-value analysis found minimal influence of unknown study confounders. Factors associated with long-term mortality were porcine valve (p < 0.001), age (p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (p < 0.001), preop renal insufficiency (p < 0.001), peripheral artery disease (p = 0.011), congestive heart failure (p = 0.003), New York Heart Association Class III or IV (p = 0.004), surgical history-reoperation (p = 0.012), transient ischemic attack (p = 0.009), prolonged ventilation (p = 0.010), postop renal insufficiency (p < 0.001), and atrial fibrillation (p = 0.009). The indexed Effective Orifice Area (EOAi) was assessed and did not influence observed long-term survival differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This unusual lifetime study provided substantial evidence for the superiority of the pericardial over the porcine bioprosthesis in the aortic position in elderly patients. It demonstrated enhanced long-term survival benefits for elderly patients without any increase in perioperative mortality. It is intended to inform future investigation into aortic valve design.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51056,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Heart Surgery Forum\",\"volume\":\"26 6\",\"pages\":\"E869-E879\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Heart Surgery Forum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.59958/hsf.6917\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart Surgery Forum","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59958/hsf.6917","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:老年人口正以前所未有的速度增长。主动脉瓣疾病随着年龄的增长而增加。生物假体是老年患者的首选瓣膜,但最佳的组织瓣膜仍未确定。这项研究的目的是比较猪原型假体和心包假体在老年患者中的存活率:研究对象(N = 1480)包括 1990 年至 2005 年期间接受过 Carpentier-Edwards 猪(n = 650)或心包(n = 830)生物假体孤立主动脉瓣置换术的 65 岁及以上患者。结果显示:瓣膜选择与手术风险无关:结果:瓣膜选择与手术死亡率无关。心包生物瓣膜(41.8%;95% CI:37.9 至 45.7)的 10 年生存率估计值优于猪生物瓣膜(32.6%;95% CI:28.8 至 36.3);20 年生存率估计值为 5.2%(95% CI:3.2 至 7.1)对 2.0%;(95% CI:0.8 至 3.2)(P < 0.001)。E值分析发现,未知研究混杂因素的影响极小。与长期死亡率相关的因素有猪瓣膜(p < 0.001)、年龄(p < 0.001)、糖尿病(p < 0.001)、术前肾功能不全(p < 0.001)、外周动脉疾病(p = 0.011)、充血性心力衰竭(p = 0.003)、纽约心脏协会 III 级或 IV 级(p = 0.004)、手术史-再手术(p = 0.012)、短暂性脑缺血发作(p = 0.009)、通气时间延长(p = 0.010)、术后肾功能不全(p < 0.001)和心房颤动(p = 0.009)。对有效气道面积(EOAi)进行了评估,结果显示,有效气道面积并不影响观察到的长期存活率差异:这项不寻常的终生研究提供了大量证据,证明在老年患者的主动脉位置,心包生物假体比猪生物假体更有优势。该研究表明,老年患者的长期生存率提高了,而围术期死亡率却没有增加。该研究旨在为今后的主动脉瓣设计研究提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Long-Term Survival Benefits of Porcine versus Pericardial Bioprostheses in Elderly Patients Undergoing Isolated Aortic Valve Replacement: A 32-Year Study.

Background: The elderly population is growing at an unprecedented rate. Aortic valve disease increases with age. Bioprostheses are the valves of choice for older patients; however, the optimal tissue valve remains undetermined. The purpose of this investigation was to perform a life-of-patient survival comparison of the prototypical porcine and pericardial prostheses in elderly patients.

Methods: The study population (N = 1480) consisted of patients 65 years of age and older who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement from 1990 through 2005 with a Carpentier-Edwards Porcine (n = 650) or Pericardial (n = 830) bioprosthesis. Propensity score-matched groups were created.

Results: Valve selection was not associated with operative mortality. Survival estimates at 10 years were better for Pericardial (41.8%; 95% CI: 37.9 to 45.7) than Porcine (32.6%; 95% CI: 28.8 to 36.3); and 5.2% (95% CI: 3.2 to 7.1) versus 2.0%; (95% CI: 0.8 to 3.2) at 20 years (p < 0.001). E-value analysis found minimal influence of unknown study confounders. Factors associated with long-term mortality were porcine valve (p < 0.001), age (p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (p < 0.001), preop renal insufficiency (p < 0.001), peripheral artery disease (p = 0.011), congestive heart failure (p = 0.003), New York Heart Association Class III or IV (p = 0.004), surgical history-reoperation (p = 0.012), transient ischemic attack (p = 0.009), prolonged ventilation (p = 0.010), postop renal insufficiency (p < 0.001), and atrial fibrillation (p = 0.009). The indexed Effective Orifice Area (EOAi) was assessed and did not influence observed long-term survival differences.

Conclusions: This unusual lifetime study provided substantial evidence for the superiority of the pericardial over the porcine bioprosthesis in the aortic position in elderly patients. It demonstrated enhanced long-term survival benefits for elderly patients without any increase in perioperative mortality. It is intended to inform future investigation into aortic valve design.

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
Heart Surgery Forum
Heart Surgery Forum 医学-外科
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
130
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Heart Surgery Forum® is an international peer-reviewed, open access journal seeking original investigative and clinical work on any subject germane to the science or practice of modern cardiac care. The HSF publishes original scientific reports, collective reviews, case reports, editorials, and letters to the editor. New manuscripts are reviewed by reviewers for originality, content, relevancy and adherence to scientific principles in a double-blind process. The HSF features a streamlined submission and peer review process with an anticipated completion time of 30 to 60 days from the date of receipt of the original manuscript. Authors are encouraged to submit full color images and video that will be included in the web version of the journal at no charge.
×
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