Key result
Early discharge within 72 hours after percutaneous mitral valve repair showed no difference in survival, freedom from heart failure, and major adverse events at 90 days compared to later discharge (P>0.05).
Why the study?
Does early discharge (within 72 hours) after percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair affect mortality, heart failure rehospitalization, or major adverse events compared to standard discharge in patients with severe mitral regurgitation?
Observational (n=269)
Does early discharge (within 72 hours) after percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair affect mortality, heart failure rehospitalization, or major adverse events compared to standard discharge in patients with severe mitral regurgitation?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Early discharge appears feasible without excess risk in selected patients; leaves open confirmation via randomized trials before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (PMVR) recently emerged as an effective treatment modality for patients with severe mitral regurgitation (MR). Length of postprocedural hospital stay may represent a modifiable cost associated with percutaneous treatment. We looked at feasibility, predictors and safety of early discharge (ED), defined as hospital discharge within 72 hours, in patients undergoing PMVR. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients treated with MitraClip from October 2008 to December 2015 were analysed. Primary outcomes of interest were cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality, rehospitalisation for heart failure and major adverse events at 30 days and 90 days. A total of 269 patients were included. Of these, 115 patients were early discharged (ED group). Rates of ED increased from 25.9% for the biennium 2008-2009 to 59.1% in 2014-2015 (p<0.001 for trend). In a penalised logistic regression model, male gender (OR=2.13, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.95) and procedural year (OR=2.13, 95% CI 1.51 to 3.11) were associated with higher probability of ED. Conversely, atrial fibrillation (OR=0.48, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.85), any Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium bleeding (OR=0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.60), log-transformed N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels (OR=0.79, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.99) and postimplant MR grade (OR=0.60, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.94) conferred a lower likelihood of ED. In propensity score-weighted analyses, overall survival, freedom from heart failure and major adverse events at 30 days and 90 days were not different in ED and non-ED groups (all weighted log-rank p value>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients undergoing PMVR, ED may be feasible and safe.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tamburino et al. (2017) conducted an observational in Severe mitral regurgitation (n=269). Early discharge (within 72 hours) vs. Non-early discharge was evaluated on Cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality, rehospitalisation for heart failure and major adverse events at 30 days and 90 days (p=>0.05). Early discharge within 72 hours after percutaneous mitral valve repair showed no difference in survival, freedom from heart failure, and major adverse events at 90 days compared to later discharge (P>0.05).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: