Why the study?
Does cumulative incidence analysis compared to Kaplan-Meier analysis provide a different estimate of reoperation-free survival in patients >60 years undergoing mitral valve replacement with biological prostheses?
Population
257 patients older than 60 years who underwent mitral valve replacement with different biological prostheses…
Comparison
Cumulative incidence statistical method… vs Kaplan-Meier statistical method
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
up to 15 years
Authors
Loading...
Kaplan-Meier may overestimate reoperation risk after bioprosthetic MVR in patients >60 years; leaves open whether cumulative incidence alters prosthesis selection.
Does cumulative incidence analysis compared to Kaplan-Meier analysis provide a different estimate of reoperation-free survival in patients >60 years undergoing mitral valve replacement with biological prostheses?
Kaplan-Meier analysis overestimates the long-term risk of structural valve degeneration compared to cumulative incidence analysis, which accounts for competing risks like death.
Kaempchen et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: