Key result
Beating heart technique shows similar in-hospital mortality versus arrested heart technique for isolated tricuspid valve surgery.
Why the study?
Data about the beating heart technique for isolated tricuspid valve surgery compared to the arrested heart technique are sparse.
Does the beating heart technique compared to the arrested heart technique improve survival to hospital discharge in patients undergoing isolated tricuspid valve surgery?
Observational (n=82)
Does the beating heart technique compared to the arrested heart technique improve survival to hospital discharge in patients undergoing isolated tricuspid valve surgery?
The beating heart technique for isolated tricuspid valve surgery yields comparable in-hospital mortality to the arrested heart technique, despite being utilized in patients with a higher surgical risk profile.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BH yields comparable in-hospital mortality to AH for isolated TV surgery despite higher-risk patients; leaves open need for randomized trials.
BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Data about the beating heart (BH) technique for isolated tricuspid valve (TV) surgery compared to the arrested heart (AH) technique are sparse. We compared the outcomes of isolated TV surgery between BH and AH technique. METHODS: We performed an observational analysis of our database of isolated TV surgery. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether surgery was performed without (BH group) or with (AH group) aortic cross-clamping and cardioplegic arrest. The primary endpoint was survival to hospital discharge. Risk factors for in-hospital mortality were searched with multivariate analyses. We undertook further comparisons after propensity-score matching. RESULTS: From January 2007 to December 2017, we performed 82 isolated TV surgery (BH group, n = 47, 57.3%; AH group, n = 35, 42.7%). The mean age was 59.1 years, 56.1% were female. BH group patients were older (61.8 vs. 55.4 years; p = .035), had greater impaired renal function (glomerular filtration rate, 61.1 vs. 74.6 ml/min; p = .012), were more frequently operated for secondary TR (61.7 vs. 31.4%; p = .008), underwent more frequently a reoperation (53.2 vs. 28.6%; p = .042) and exhibited a higher surgical risk (EuroSCORE II, 3.92 vs. 2.50%; p = .013). In-hospital mortality was not different between both groups, either considering unmatched (BH = 10.6 vs. AH = 5.7%; OR = 1.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.36-10.77) or matched populations (BH = 10.6 vs. AH = 6.4%; OR = 1.89, 95% CI = 0.36-9.97). Age was the only predictor of in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The BH technique showed comparable outcomes to the AH technique for isolated TV surgery despite a higher risk profile.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Grinberg et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Isolated tricuspid valve surgery (n=82). Beating heart technique vs. Arrested heart technique was evaluated on Survival to hospital discharge (in-hospital mortality) (OR 1.89, 95% CI 0.36-9.97). The beating heart technique for isolated tricuspid valve surgery resulted in similar in-hospital mortality compared to the arrested heart technique.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: