Key result
Surgical treatment in elderly patients with symptomatic severe heart valve disease was associated with significantly higher 5-year survival compared to conservative treatment (77.2% vs. 45.4%, P < 0.0001).
Why the study?
Does surgical treatment improve long-term survival compared to conservative treatment in elderly patients with symptomatic severe heart valve disease?
Observational (n=234)
No
Does surgical treatment improve long-term survival compared to conservative treatment in elderly patients with symptomatic severe heart valve disease?
In elderly patients with symptomatic severe heart valve disease, surgical intervention is safe and provides significantly better long-term survival compared to conservative medical management.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support surgery in selected elderly patients; leaves open randomized confirmation of benefit.
BACKGROUND: A considerable proportion of elderly patients with symptomatic severe heart valve disease are treated conservatively despite clear indications for surgical intervention. However, little is known about how advanced age and comorbidities affect treatment decision-making and therapeutic outcomes. METHODS: Patients (n = 234, mean age: 78.5 ± 3.7 years) with symptomatic severe heart valve disease hospitalized in our center were included. One hundred and fifty-one patients (65%) were treated surgically (surgical group) and 83 (35%) were treated conservatively (conservative group). Factors that affected therapeutic decision-making and treatment outcomes were investigated and long-term survival was explored. RESULTS: Isolated aortic valve disease, female sex, chronic renal insufficiency, aged ≥ 80 years, pneumonia, and emergent status were independent factors associated with therapeutic decision-making. In-hospital mortality for the surgical group was 5.3% (8/151). Three patients (3.6%) in the conservative group died during initial hospitalization. Low cardiac output syndrome and chronic renal insufficiency were identified as predictors of in-hospital mortality in the surgical group. Conservative treatment was identified as the single risk factor for late death in the entire study population. The surgical group had better 5-year (77.2% vs. 45.4%, P < 0.0001) and 10-year (34.5% vs. 8.9%, P < 0.0001) survival rates than the conservative group, even when adjusted by propensity score-matched analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced age and geriatric comorbidities profoundly affect treatment decision-making for severe heart valve disease. Valve surgery in the elderly was not only safe but was also associated with good long-term survival while conservative treatment was unfavorable for patients with symptomatic severe valve disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hu et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Symptomatic severe heart valve disease (n=234). Surgical treatment vs. Conservative treatment was evaluated on 5-year survival (p=<0.0001). Surgical treatment in elderly patients with symptomatic severe heart valve disease was associated with significantly higher 5-year survival compared to conservative treatment (77.2% vs. 45.4%, P < 0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: