Is mitral valve surgery safe in octogenarians?☆
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes of mitral valve surgery in octogenarians. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively from January 1996 to March 2004 at two surgical centers. Of 1386 consecutive patients with mitral valve surgery, 58 (4.2%) were aged > or = 80 years. Survival data were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards modeling and Kaplan-Meier actuarial log rank statistics. RESULTS: Octogenarians were similar to younger patients for the presence of pre-operative hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, and smoking history. Octogenarians had a higher incidence of cerebrovascular disease (19.0 versus 7.8%, P = 0.003), urgent in-hospital surgery (55.2 versus 28.6%, P < 0.001), and presence of ischemic disease requiring combined mitral valve plus revascularization surgery (72.4 versus 41.0%, P < 0.001). Mitral valve repair was performed in a similar proportion of octogenarians and younger patients (44.8 versus 45.6%). Thirty-day mortality for octogenarians was significantly higher than younger patients (15.5 versus 5.6%, P = 0.002), and actuarial survival of octogenarians was significantly decreased (P = 0.009). However, 52.3% of the octogenarians were alive at 7-years following surgery. Independent predictors of mortality from multivariate risk adjusted modeling of the entire cohort were: emergency surgery (hazards ratio [HR] = 2.94, P < 0.001), combined mitral valve plus revascularization surgery (HR = 2.27, P < 0.001), mitral valve replacement (HR = 1.85, P < 0.01), and age > or = 80 years (HR = 1.80, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Octogenarians undergoing mitral valve surgery have significantly greater incidence of urgent surgery, ischemic disease requiring combined revascularization surgery, and have decreased rates of survival. While caution is required when operating on these higher risk elderly patients, overall 52.3% of the octogenarians are alive at 7-years following surgery, which is greater than the survival of octogenarians in the community. The greatest survival benefit within octogenarians occurred when mitral valve repair was possible over replacement. Further study will more clearly define subgroups of octogenarians with potentially greater benefit from mitral valve surgery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".