Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35047791›Full record

ArticleBMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies2020

Age-stratified outcomes of bioprosthetic and mechanical aortic valve replacements in an Australian cohort of 13 377 patients.

Oluwadamisola Temilade Sotade, Michael Falster, Leonard N Girardi, Sallie-Anne Pearson, Louisa R Jorm

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Oluwadamisola Temilade SotadeCentre For Big Data Research in Health, University of New South Wales Faculty of Medicine, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2291-1078
Michael FalsterCentre For Big Data Research in Health, University of New South Wales Faculty of Medicine, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6444-7272
Leonard N GirardiCardiothoracic Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA.
Sallie-Anne PearsonCentre For Big Data Research in Health, University of New South Wales Faculty of Medicine, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7137-6855
Louisa R JormCentre For Big Data Research in Health, University of New South Wales Faculty of Medicine, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0390-661X
UNSW Sydney · AUCornell University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo quantify age-stratified outcomes of bioprosthetic valve (BV) and mechanical valve (MV) surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) in Australian patients.

designRetrospective cohort study using population-based linked hospital morbidity and mortality data.

settingPublic and private hospitals.

participantsPatients aged 18 years and over undergoing AVR from 2001 to 2013, stratified by age (18-64 years; 65+ years).

main outcome measuresAge-standardized index AVR rates; rates and multivariable-adjusted (age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index) incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for reoperation, incident cardiovascular events (hospitalization or death for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, major hemorrhage or thromboembolism) and mortality (cardiovascular and all-cause).

resultsOur cohort comprised 13 377 patients, of whom 3464 (26%) were aged 18-64 years. Annual age-standardized AVR rates increased by 2.7% with BV implants increasing in both age groups. After 5 years of follow-up, patients implanted with BV had lower rates of stroke (IRR: 0.40, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.60) and hemorrhage (IRR: 0.36, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.50). Among patients 65+ years, those implanted with BV had lower rates of AMI, hemorrhage, and cardiovascular and all-cause mortality than those implanted with MV (IRR: 0.71, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.96; IRR: 0.77, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95; IRR: 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.92 and IRR: 0.85, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.97, respectively). After 6-10 years of follow-up, reoperation rates among patients 18-64 years were markedly higher in those implanted with BV compared with MV (IRR: 5.48, 95% CI 2.38 to 12.62) and rates of AMI were lower among patients implanted with BV compared with MV (IRR: 0.49, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.94). Among patients 65+ years rates of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality remained significantly lower for patients implanted with BV compared with MV.

conclusionsThis study provides real-world evidence of AVR use and outcomes. Use of BV implants is increasing irrespective of age. Valve choice in younger patients requires thorough evaluation of patient factors influencing both short-term outcomes and longer-term risks of reoperation, stroke and hemorrhage.

Indexed as

cardiac devicesexploration studyhealth technologyheart valve prosthesis implantationoutcomes research

Identifiers

PMID35047791
PMCPMC8749260
OpenAlexW3096905899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.