Key result
In children <5 years undergoing mechanical mitral valve replacement, younger age and smaller prosthesis size strongly predicted the need for a second MVR (OR 7.7 and 6.8, respectively).
Why the study?
What are the predictors of prosthesis survival, somatic growth, and functional status following mechanical mitral valve replacement in children aged <5 years?
Population
102 children aged <5 years who survived initial mechanical mitral valve replacement, from the Pediatric…
Comparison
Initial mechanical mitral valve replacement (MVR). vs Patients requiring a second MVR versus those not…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
median 6.0 years (interquartile range: 3.0 to 10.6 years)
Authors
Loading...
Smaller prostheses in younger children may heighten reoperation risk; leaves open optimal initial sizing strategies.
Cohort (n=102)
Yes
What are the predictors of prosthesis survival, somatic growth, and functional status following mechanical mitral valve replacement in children aged <5 years?
Odds Ratio: 7.7 (95% CI 2.6–22.7)
In children under 5 years undergoing mechanical MVR, prosthesis survival is strongly predicted by age and prosthesis size at the time of initial surgery, though somatic growth and functional status remain favorable.
Raghuveer et al. (2003) conducted a cohort in Mechanical mitral valve replacement (n=102). First MVR age was evaluated on Prosthesis survival (need for second MVR) (OR 7.7, 95% CI 2.6-22.7). In children <5 years undergoing mechanical mitral valve replacement, younger age and smaller prosthesis size strongly predicted the need for a second MVR (OR 7.7 and 6.8, respectively).
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: