Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Cardiovasc Diabetol ; 23(1): 260, 2024 Jul 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39026315

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Type I and type II diabetes mellitus (DM) patients have a higher prevalence of cardiovascular diseases, as well as a higher mortality risk of cardiovascular diseases and interventions. This study provides an update on the impact of DM on clinical outcomes, including mortality, complications and reinterventions, using data on percutaneous and surgical cardiac interventions in the Netherlands. METHODS: This is a retrospective, nearby nationwide study using real-world observational data registered by the Netherlands Heart Registration (NHR) between 2015 and 2020. Patients treated for combined or isolated coronary artery disease (CAD) and aortic valve disease (AVD) were studied. Bivariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between DM and clinical outcomes both unadjusted and adjusted for baseline characteristics. RESULTS: 241,360 patients underwent the following interventions; percutaneous coronary intervention(N = 177,556), coronary artery bypass grafting(N = 39,069), transcatheter aortic valve implantation(N = 11,819), aortic valve replacement(N = 8,028) and combined CABG and AVR(N = 4,888). The incidence of DM type I and II was 21.1%, 26.7%, 17.8%, 27.6% and 27% respectively. For all procedures, there are statistically significant differences between patients living with and without diabetes, adjusted for baseline characteristics, at the expense of patients with diabetes for 30-days mortality after PCI (OR = 1.68; p <.001); 120-days mortality after CABG (OR = 1.35; p <.001), AVR (OR = 1.5; p <.03) and CABG + AVR (OR = 1.42; p =.02); and 1-year mortality after CABG (OR = 1.43; p <.001), TAVI (OR = 1.21; p =.01) and PCI (OR = 1.68; p <.001). CONCLUSION: Patients with DM remain to have unfavourable outcomes compared to nondiabetic patients which calls for a critical reappraisal of existing care pathways aimed at diabetic patients within the cardiovascular field.


Assuntos
Ponte de Artéria Coronária , Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1 , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Sistema de Registros , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/mortalidade , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/mortalidade , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/terapia , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/cirurgia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição de Risco , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Ponte de Artéria Coronária/efeitos adversos , Ponte de Artéria Coronária/mortalidade , Países Baixos/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/mortalidade , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/terapia , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/efeitos adversos , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/mortalidade , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/mortalidade , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/complicações , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/terapia , Incidência , Valvopatia Aórtica/cirurgia , Valvopatia Aórtica/mortalidade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/mortalidade , Hospitais com Alto Volume de Atendimentos
2.
Neth Heart J ; 30(2): 106-112, 2022 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34373997

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate real-world outcomes of patients with degenerated biological aortic valve prostheses who had undergone valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) or reoperative surgical aortic valve replacement (redo-SAVR) in the Netherlands. METHODS: Patients who had undergone ViV-TAVI or redo-SAVR for a degenerated biological aortic valve prosthesis in the Netherlands between January 2014 and December 2018 were eligible for this retrospective study. Patients with a prior homograft, active endocarditis or mechanical aortic valve prosthesis were excluded. Patients were matched using the propensity score. The primary endpoint was a composite of 30-day all-cause mortality and in-hospital postoperative stroke. Secondary endpoints were all-cause mortality at different time points, in-hospital postoperative stroke, pacemaker implantation and redo procedures within one year. Baseline characteristics and outcome data were collected from the Netherlands Heart Registration. RESULTS: From 16 cardiac centres, 653 patients were included in the study (374 ViV-TAVI and 279 redo-SAVR). European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation I (EuroSCORE I) was higher in ViV-TAVI patients (19.4, interquartile range (IQR) 13.3-27.9 vs 13.8, IQR 8.3-21.9, p < 0.01). After propensity score matching, 165 patients were matched with acceptable covariate balance. In the matched cohorts, the primary endpoint was not significantly different for ViV-TAVI and redo-SAVR patients (odds ratio 1.30, 95% confidence interval 0.57-3.02). Procedural, 30-day and 1­year all-cause mortality rates, incidence of in-hospital postoperative stroke, pacemaker implantation and redo procedures within one year were also similar between cohorts. CONCLUSION: Patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses treated with ViV-TAVI or redo-SAVR have similar mortality and morbidity.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA