Three-year survival of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in dialysis.

To highlight the trends of surgical (open) aortic valve replacement (SAVR) as well as to compare the outcome between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and SAVR in elderly dialysis patients. TAVR has evolved as an effective alternative to surgery (SAVR) for aortic stenosis. We identified dialysis-dependent patients who underwent SAVR or TAVR from 2000 to 2015 from the United States Renal Data System using ICD-9 codes. We defined high-risk surgical patients as age over 70 or older. The primary endpoint was survival at 3 years and we compared the outcome between SAVR and TAVR groups using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). A total of 4332 and 1280 dialysis patients underwent SAVR and TAVR, respectively, during the study period. Among SAVR cohort, 3312 patients underwent SAVR before June 2012 and 1020 after June 2012. In-hospital mortality was significantly worse before 2012 (14.6% vs. 11.3% after 2012, p = 0.007) as well as estimated 3-year mortality (69.1% vs. 60.3% after 2012, p < 0.001). After June 2012, the TAVR cohort was older and had more comorbidities including coronary artery disease and congestive heart failure compared to the SAVR cohort. After IPTW, in-hospital mortality was significantly lower after TAVR versus SAVR (odds ratio 0.38 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-0.52], p < 0.001). However, TAVR had a significantly higher risk of 3-year mortality than SAVR (hazard ratio 1.24 [95% CI 1.1-1.39], p < 0.001). TAVR may be a reasonable and potentially preferable alternative to SAVR in the elderly dialysis population in the short-term period.

Proximal aortic repair in dialysis patients: A national database analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Dialysis is a well-established risk factor for morbidity and mortality after cardiovascular procedures. However, little is known regarding the outcomes of proximal aortic surgery in this high-risk cohort. METHODS: Perioperative (in-hospital or 30-day mortality) and 10-year outcomes were analyzed for all the patients who underwent open proximal aortic repair with the diagnosis of nonruptured thoracic aortic aneurysm (aneurysm, n = 325) or type A aortic dissection (dissection, n = 461) from 1987 to 2015 using the US Renal Data System database. RESULTS: In patients with aneurysm, perioperative mortality was 12.6%. The 10-year mortality was 81% ± 3%. Age 65 years or more (hazard ratio [HR], 1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 to 1.78; P = .03), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.01-2.82; P = .047), and Black race (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.09-1.97; P = .01) were independently associated with worse 10-year mortality. In patients with dissection, perioperative mortality was 24.3% and 10-year mortality was 87.9% ± 2.2%. Age 65 years or more (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.19-1.86; P < .001), congestive heart failure (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.11-2.57; P = .004), and diabetes mellitus as the cause of dialysis (HR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.2-2.57; P = .004) were independently associated with worse 10-year mortality. Black race (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.6-0.92; P = .008) was associated with a better outcome. CONCLUSIONS: We described challenging perioperative and 10-year outcomes for dialysis patients undergoing proximal aortic repair. The present study suggests the need for careful patient selection in the elective repair of proximal aortic aneurysm for dialysis-dependent patients, whereas it affirms the feasibility of emergency surgery for acute type A aortic dissections.

Survival benefits in colorectal adenocarcinoma with the use of metformin among a black diabetic inner city population.

We assessed the association of metformin use with survival in colorectal cancer in a population consists mostly of African-American and Afro-Caribbean patients. We identified 585 colorectal cancer patients, 167 (28.6%) and 418 (71.5%) were as diabetic (DM) and nondiabetic, respectively. The diagnosis of diabetes did not impact cancer survival or extent of disease. Overall, DMs with metformin use (D+M+) have better overall survival than both DMs without metformin use (D+M∼) and nondiabetics (D∼M∼), with a mean survival of 109.9 months compared with 95.7 and 106.1 months, respectively (log-rank p < 0.05). The use of metformin shows significant reduction of risk of mortality compared with nonusers (hazard ratio: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.15-0.81; p = 0.01). Use of insulin and status of diabetes did not have a significant impact on overall cancer survival.