| Literature DB >> 35877574 |
Hongyuan Lin1, Jiamiao Gong1, Yongjian Wu1, Zhe Zheng1, Jianfeng Hou1.
Abstract
The goal of this study is to summarize valvular surgery data from the Chinese Cardiac Surgery Registry (CCSR) and compare it to the most recent data from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS). From 2016 to 2018, a total of 34,386 cases of the seven most common valvular surgical procedures was obtained from the CCSR. We calculated the proportions of different procedures in the CCSR cohort (n = 34,386) as well as the change in operation volume for each procedure. We also compiled rates of postoperative in-hospital mortality and five major complications across all procedures. All of the results were compared to the STS data. The CCSR and STS data showed divergent trends in valvular heart disease features and operation volume. Although the proportion of MV repair in the CCSR (13.7%) data was lower than in the STS data (23.2%), it demonstrated a substantial upward trend. In terms of operation volume, the CCSR data showed an upward trend, but the STS data showed a downward trend. CCSR procedures showed lower mortality (2% vs. 2.6%), reoperation (2.8% vs. 4.3%), and permanent stroke (0.5% vs. 1.6%) rates than STS procedures but higher rates of prolonged ventilation (22.4% vs. 10.4%) and renal failure (5.6% vs. 3.2%). Valvular surgery quality in China's leading cardiac hospitals is roughly comparable to that in the United States. China, on the other hand, has some shortcomings that need improvement.Entities:
Keywords: CCSR; STS; VHD; quality; surgery; valvular heart disease
Year: 2022 PMID: 35877574 PMCID: PMC9319982 DOI: 10.3390/jcdd9070212
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Dev Dis ISSN: 2308-3425
Figure 1Proportions of the seven most commonly performed VHD surgeries. CCSR: Chinese Cardiac Surgery Registry; STS: Society of Thoracic Surgeons; AVR: aortic valve replacement; MVR: mitral valve replacement; CABG: coronary artery bypass grafting.
Change in procedure volume in CCSR data from 2016 to 2018 and in STS data from 2018 to 2019.
| Procedure | CCSR 2016 | CCSR 2018 | CCSR Change: 2016 to 2018 (%) | STS | STS | STS Change: |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 11,850 | 12,044 | 1.6 ↑ | 75,597 | 68,747 | −9.1 ↓ |
| Isolated AVR | 3033 | 3395 | 11.9 ↑ | 25,646 | 20,965 | −18.3 ↓ |
| Isolated MVR | 4042 | 3876 | −4.1 ↓ | 10,823 | 10,748 | −0.7 ↓ |
| MV repair | 1231 | 1429 | 16.1 ↑ | 12,608 | 12,570 | −0.3 ↓ |
| AVR and CABG | 493 | 547 | 11.0 ↑ | 16,100 | 12,246 | −11.5 ↓ |
| MVR and CABG | 486 | 512 | 5.3 ↑ | 3554 | 3441 | −3.2 ↓ |
| MV repair and CABG | 271 | 291 | 7.4 ↑ | 4151 | 4153 | 0.0 |
| AVR and MVR | 2294 | 1994 | −13.1 ↓ | 2715 | 2624 | −3.4 ↓ |
CCSR: Chinese Cardiac Surgery Registry; STS: Society of Thoracic Surgeons; AVR: aortic valve replacement; MVR: mitral valve replacement; CABG: coronary artery bypass grafting. ↑: increase; ↓: decrease.
Figure 2Distribution of in-hospital mortality and other major complication rates (%) in different procedures. CCSR: Chinese Cardiac Surgery Registry; STS: Society of Thoracic Surgeons; AVR: aortic valve replacement; MVR: mitral valve replacement; CABG: coronary artery bypass grafting; DSWI: deep stern wound infection.
Figure 3Comparison of outcomes in the whole cohort between CCSR and STS procedures. CCSR: Chinese Cardiac Surgery Registry; STS: Society of Thoracic Surgeons; DSWI: deep sternal wound infection. ***: p-value < 0.001.
Figure 4Comparison of outcomes in different procedures between CCSR and STS data. CCSR: Chinese Cardiac Surgery Registry; STS: Society of Thoracic Surgeons; AVR: aortic valve replacement; MVR: mitral valve replacement; CABG: coronary artery bypass grafting; DSWI: deep sternal wound infection. *: 0.01 < p-value < 0.05; **: 0.001 < p-value < 0.01; ***: p-value < 0.001.