Selena Zhou1, Natalia Egorova2, Gil Moskowitz1, Gennaro Giustino3, Gorav Ailawadi4, Michael A Acker5, Marc Gillinov6, Alan Moskowitz1, Annetine Gelijns1. 1. Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY. 2. Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY. Electronic address: natalia.egorova@mountsinai.org. 3. Department of Cardiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY. 4. Section of Adult Cardiac Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va. 5. Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa. 6. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The dissemination of mitral valve repair as the first-line treatment and the introduction of MitraClip for patients who have a prohibitive risk for surgery have changed the landscape of mitral valve intervention. The aim of this study is to provide current and generalizable data regarding the trend of mitral valve interventions and outcomes from 2000 to 2016. METHODS: Patients ≥18 years of age who underwent mitral-valve interventions were identified using the National Inpatient Sample database. National estimates were generated by means of discharge weights; comorbid conditions were identified using Elixhauser methods. All trends were analyzed with JoinPoint software. RESULTS: A total of 656,030 mitral valve interventions (298,102 mitral valve replacement, 349,053 mitral valve repair, and 8875 MitraClip) were assessed. No changes in rate of procedures (per 100,000 people in the United States) were observed over this period (annual percent change, -0.4; 95% confidence limit, -1.1 to 0.3; P = .3). From 2000 to 2010, the number of replacements decreased by 5.6% per year (P < .001), whereas repair increased by 8.4% per year from 2000 to 2006 (P < .001). MitraClip procedures increased by 84.4% annually from 2013 to 2016 (P < .001). The burden of comorbidities increased throughout the study for all groups, with the greatest score for MitraClip recipients. Overall, length of stay has decreased for all interventions, most significantly for MitraClip. In-hospital mortality decreased from 8.5% to 3.7% for all interventions, with MitraClip having the most substantial decrease from 3.6% to 1.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Over a 17-year period, mitral-valve interventions were associated with improved outcomes despite being applied to an increasingly sicker population.
OBJECTIVE: The dissemination of mitral valve repair as the first-line treatment and the introduction of MitraClip for patients who have a prohibitive risk for surgery have changed the landscape of mitral valve intervention. The aim of this study is to provide current and generalizable data regarding the trend of mitral valve interventions and outcomes from 2000 to 2016. METHODS: Patients ≥18 years of age who underwent mitral-valve interventions were identified using the National Inpatient Sample database. National estimates were generated by means of discharge weights; comorbid conditions were identified using Elixhauser methods. All trends were analyzed with JoinPoint software. RESULTS: A total of 656,030 mitral valve interventions (298,102 mitral valve replacement, 349,053 mitral valve repair, and 8875 MitraClip) were assessed. No changes in rate of procedures (per 100,000 people in the United States) were observed over this period (annual percent change, -0.4; 95% confidence limit, -1.1 to 0.3; P = .3). From 2000 to 2010, the number of replacements decreased by 5.6% per year (P < .001), whereas repair increased by 8.4% per year from 2000 to 2006 (P < .001). MitraClip procedures increased by 84.4% annually from 2013 to 2016 (P < .001). The burden of comorbidities increased throughout the study for all groups, with the greatest score for MitraClip recipients. Overall, length of stay has decreased for all interventions, most significantly for MitraClip. In-hospital mortality decreased from 8.5% to 3.7% for all interventions, with MitraClip having the most substantial decrease from 3.6% to 1.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Over a 17-year period, mitral-valve interventions were associated with improved outcomes despite being applied to an increasingly sicker population.
Authors: Joanna Chikwe; Nana Toyoda; Anelechi C Anyanwu; Shinobu Itagaki; Natalia N Egorova; Percy Boateng; Ahmed El-Eshmawi; David H Adams Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Benjamin H Trichon; G Michael Felker; Linda K Shaw; Christopher H Cabell; Christopher M O'Connor Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2003-03-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Gregg W Stone; JoAnn Lindenfeld; William T Abraham; Saibal Kar; D Scott Lim; Jacob M Mishell; Brian Whisenant; Paul A Grayburn; Michael Rinaldi; Samir R Kapadia; Vivek Rajagopal; Ian J Sarembock; Andreas Brieke; Steven O Marx; David J Cohen; Neil J Weissman; Michael J Mack Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-09-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Khalid Sawalha; Anis John Kadado; Kamesh Gupta; Mohammad Al-Akchar; Ayman Battisha; Mohammed Abozenah; Colby Salerno; Manish Gupta; Ahmad Khan; Ashequl M Islam Journal: Cardiovasc Revasc Med Date: 2020-08-12