Long-term safety and effectiveness of mechanical versus biologic aortic valve prostheses in older patients: Results from the society of thoracic surgeons adult cardiac surgery national database

Circulation

Volumn 127, Issue 16, 2013, Pages 1647-1655

  Brennan, J Matthew ^a   Edwards, Fred H ^b   Zhao, Yue ^a   O'Brien, Sean ^a   Booth, Michael E ^a   Dokholyan, Rachel S ^a   Douglas, Pamela S ^a   Peterson, Eric D ^a  

^a DUKE CLINICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

aortic valve; comparative effectiveness research; heart valve prosthesis

Indexed keywords

AGED; AORTA VALVE PROSTHESIS; AORTA VALVE REGURGITATION; AORTA VALVE REPLACEMENT; AORTA VALVE STENOSIS; ARTICLE; BLEEDING; BRAIN HEMORRHAGE; CARDIOPULMONARY BYPASS; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; DEATH; DEVICE SAFETY; ENDOCARDITIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICARE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REOPERATION;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AORTIC VALVE; BIOPROSTHESIS; CARDIOLOGY; COMORBIDITY; DATABASES, FACTUAL; ENDOCARDITIS; FEMALE; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HEMORRHAGE; HUMANS; MALE; MEDICARE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROGNOSIS; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; STROKE; THORACIC SURGERY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84876514740     PISSN: 00097322     EISSN: 15244539     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.002003     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Health Research International Report. Report No. 057-1-US-0705-221, ES-5.
2. Brown JM, O'Brien SM, Wu C, Sikora JA, Griffth BP, Gammie JS. Isolated aortic valve replacement in North America comprising 108, 687 patients in 10 years: changes in risks, valve types, and outcomes in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;137:82-90.
3. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC Jr, Faxon DP, Freed MD, Gaasch WH, Lytle BW, Nishimura RA, O'Gara PT, O'Rourke RA, Otto CM, Shah PM, Shanewise JS; 2006 Writing Committee Members; American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force. 2008 Focused update incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1998 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease): endorsed by the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation. 2008;118:e523-e661.
4. Grunkemeier GL, Li HH, Naftel DC, Starr A, Rahimtoola SH. Longterm performance of heart valve prostheses. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2000;25:73-154.
5. Rahimtoola SH. Choice of prosthetic heart valve for adult patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:893-904.
6. Hammermeister K, Sethi GK, Henderson WG, Grover FL, Oprian C, Rahimtoola SH. Outcomes 15 years after valve replacement with a mechanical versus a bioprosthetic valve: fnal report of the Veterans Affairs randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36:1152-1158.
7. Oxenham H, Bloomfeld P, Wheatley DJ, Lee RJ, Cunningham J, Prescott RJ, Miller HC. Twenty year comparison of a Bjork-Shiley mechanical heart valve with porcine bioprostheses. Heart. 2003;89:715-721.
8. Schelbert EB, Vaughan-Sarrazin MS, Welke KF, Rosenthal GE. Valve type and long-term outcomes after aortic valve replacement in older patients. Heart. 2008;94:1181-1188.
9. Peterseim DS, Cen YY, Cheruvu S, Landolfo K, Bashore TM, Lowe JE, Wolfe WG, Glower DD. Long-term outcome after biologic versus mechanical aortic valve replacement in 841 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1999;117:890-897.
10. Kulik A, Bédard P, Lam BK, Rubens FD, Hendry PJ, Masters RG, Mesana TG, Ruel M. Mechanical versus bioprosthetic valve replacement in middle-aged patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006;30:485-491.
11. Welke KF, Ferguson TB Jr, Coombs LP, Dokholyan RS, Murray CJ, Schrader MA, Peterson ED. Validity of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Adult Cardiac Surgery Database. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;77:1137-1139.
12. Hammill BG, Hernandez AF, Peterson ED, Fonarow GC, Schulman KA, Curtis LH. Linking inpatient clinical registry data to Medicare claims data using indirect identifers. Am Heart J. 2009;157:995-1000.
13. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of propensity scores in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika. 1983;70:41-55.
14. Austin PC. A critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003. Stat Med. 2008;27:2037-2049.
15. Cole SR, Hernán MA. Adjusted survival curves with inverse probability weights. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2004;75:45-49.
16. Lin DY, Wei LJ. The robust inference for the cox proportional hazards model. J Am Statistic Assoc. 1989;84:1074-1078.
17. Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Statistic Assoc. 1958;53:457-481.
18. Breslow NE. Discussion of Professor Cox's Paper. J Royal Stat Soc B. 1972;34:216-217.
19. Kalbfeish JD, Prentice RL. The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data. New York, NY: Wiley; 1980.
20. Akins CW, Miller DC, Turina MI, Kouchoukos NT, Blackstone EH, Grunkemeier GL, Takkenberg JJ, David TE, Butchart EG, Adams DH, Shahian DM, Hagl S, Mayer JE, Lytle BW; Councils of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery; Society of Thoracic Surgeons; European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery; Ad Hoc Liaison Committee for Standardizing Defnitions of Prosthetic Heart Valve Morbidity. Guidelines for reporting mortality and morbidity after cardiac valve interventions. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008;135:732-738.
21. Grunkemeier GL, Jamieson WR, Miller DC, Starr A. Actuarial versus actual risk of porcine structural valve deterioration. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1994;108:709-718.
22. van Buuren S, Brand JPL, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CGM, Rubin DB. Fully conditional specifcation in multivariate imputation. J Statist Comp Simulation. 2006;76:1049-1064.
23. Rubin DB. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. New York, NY: Wiley; 1987.
24. Birkmeyer NJ, Birkmeyer JD, Tosteson AN, Grunkemeier GL, Marrin CA, O'Connor GT. Prosthetic valve type for patients undergoing aortic valve replacement: a decision analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2000;70:1946-1952.
25. David TE, Armstrong S, Maganti M. Hancock II bioprosthesis for aortic valve replacement: the gold standard of bioprosthetic valves durability? Ann Thorac Surg. 2010;90:775-781.
26. Lytle BW, Cosgrove DM, Taylor PC, Goormastic M, Stewart RW, Golding LA, Gill CC, Loop FD. Primary isolated aortic valve replacement: early and late results. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1989;97:675-694.
27. Schoen FJ. Evolving concepts of cardiac valve dynamics: the continuum of development, functional structure, pathobiology, and tissue engineering. Circulation. 2008;118:1864-1880.
28. Bach DS, Radeva JI, Birnbaum HG, Fournier AA, Tuttle EG. Prevalence, referral patterns, testing, and surgery in aortic valve disease: leaving women and elderly patients behind? J Heart Valve Dis. 2007;16:362-369.
29. Jollis JG, Ancukiewicz M, DeLong ER, Pryor DB, Muhlbaier LH, Mark DB. Discordance of databases designed for claims payment versus clinical information systems: implications for outcomes research. Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:844-850.
30. Brennan JM, Dai D, Patel MR, Rao SV, Armstrong EJ, Messenger JC, Curtis JP, Shunk KA, Anstrom KJ, Eisenstein EL, Weintraub WS, Peterson ED, Douglas PS, Hillegass WB. Characteristics and long-term outcomes of percutaneous revascularization of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis in the United States: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry, 2004 to 2008. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:648-654.