Dataset Information

Role of Concomitant Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Valve Surgery for Infective Endocarditis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

It is current practice to perform concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with infective endocarditis (IE) who have relevant coronary artery disease (CAD). However, CABG may add complexity to the operation. We aimed to investigate the impact of concomitant CABG on perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for IE.

Methods

We retrospectively used data of surgically treated IE patients between 1994 and 2018 in six German cardiac surgery centers. We performed inverse probability weighting (IPW), multivariable adjustment, chi-square analysis, and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates.

Results

CAD was reported in 1242/4917 (25%) patients. Among them, 527 received concomitant CABG. After adjustment for basal characteristics between CABG and no-CABG patients using IPW, concomitant CABG was associated with higher postoperative stroke (26% vs. 21%, p = 0.003) and a trend towards higher postoperative hemodialysis (29% vs. 25%, p = 0.052). Thirty-day mortality was similar in both groups (24% vs. 23%, p = 0.370). Multivariate Cox regression analysis after IPW showed that CABG was not associated with better long-term survival (HR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.82-1.23, p = 0.998).

Conclusion

In endocarditis patients with CAD, adding CABG to valve surgery may be associated with a higher likelihood of postoperative stroke without adding long-term survival benefits. Therefore, in the absence of critical CAD, concomitant CABG may be omitted without impacting outcome. The results are limited due to a lack of data on the severity of CAD, and therefore there is a need for a randomized trial.

SUBMITTER: Diab M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8267636 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network reported that left ventricular reverse remodeling at 2 years did not differ between patients with moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation randomized to coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair (n = 150) or coronary artery bypass grafting alone (n = 151). To address health resource use implications, we compared costs and quality-adjusted survival.MethodsWe used individual patient data from the Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network trial on survival, hospitalizations, quality of life, and US hospitalization costs to estimate cumulative costs and quality-adjusted life years. A microsimulation model was developed to extrapolate to 10 years. Bootstrap and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed to address uncertainty.ResultsIn-hospital costs were $59,745 for coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair versus $51,326 for coronary artery bypass grafting alone (difference $8419; 95% uncertainty interval, 2259-18,757). Two-year costs were $81,263 versus $67,341 (difference 13,922 [2370 to 28,888]), and quality-adjusted life years were 1.35 versus 1.30 (difference 0.05; -0.04 to 0.14), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $308,343/quality-adjusted life year for coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair. At 10 years, its costs remained higher ($107,733 vs $88,583, difference 19,150 [-3866 to 56,826]) and quality-adjusted life years showed no difference (-0.92 to 0.87), with 5.08 versus 5.08. The likelihood that coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair would be considered cost-effective at 10 years based on a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100K/quality-adjusted life year did not exceed 37%. Only when this procedure reduces the death rate by a relative 5% will the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio fall below $100K/quality-adjusted life year.ConclusionsThe addition of mitral valve repair to coronary artery bypass grafting for patients with moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation is unlikely to be cost-effective. Only if late mortality benefits can be demonstrated will it meet commonly used cost-effectiveness criteria.

Project description:BACKGROUND:To date, studies evaluating outcome improvements associated with participation in physician-led collaboratives have been limited by the absence of a contemporaneous control group. We examined post cardiac surgery pneumonia rates associated with participation in a statewide, quality improvement collaborative relative to a national physician reporting program. METHODS AND RESULTS:We evaluated 911 754 coronary artery bypass operations (July 1, 2011, to June 30, 2017) performed across 1198 hospitals participating in a voluntary national physician reporting program (Society of Thoracic Surgeons [STS]), including 33 that participated in a Michigan-based collaborative (MI-Collaborative). Unlike STS hospitals not participating in the MI-Collaborative (i.e., STSnonMI) that solely received blinded reports, MI-Collaborative hospitals received a multi-faceted intervention starting November 2012 (quarterly in-person meetings showcasing unblinded data, webinars, site visits). Eighteen of the MI-Collaborative hospitals received additional support to implement recommended pneumonia prevention practices ("MI-CollaborativePlus"), whereas 15 did not ("MI-CollaborativeOnly"). We evaluated rates of postoperative pneumonia, adjusting for patient mix and hospital effects. Baseline patient characteristics were qualitatively similar between groups and time. During the preintervention period (Q3/2011 through Q3/2012), there was no statistically significant difference in the adjusted odds of pneumonia for STS hospitals participating in the MI-Collaborative compared to the STS non-MI hospitals. However, during the intervention period (Q4/2012 through Q2/2017), there was a significant 2% reduction per quarter in the adjusted odds of pneumonia for MI-Collaborative hospitals (n=33) relative to the STS-nonMI hospitals. There was a significant 3% per quarter reduction in the adjusted odds of pneumonia for the MI-CollaborativeOnly (n=15) hospitals relative to the STS-nonMI hospitals. Over the course of the overall study period, the STS-nonMI hospitals had a 1.96% reduction in risk-adjusted pneumonia (pre- vs. intervention periods), which was less than the MI-Collaborative (3.23%, P=0.011). Over the same time period, the MI-CollaborativePlus (n=18) reduced adjusted pneumonia rates by 10.29%, P=0.001. CONCLUSIONS:Participation in a physician-led collaborative was associated with significant reductions in pneumonia relative to a national quality reporting program. Interventions including collaborative learning may yield superior outcomes relative to solely using physician feedback reporting. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02068716.