Mitral valve surgery in octogenarians: long-term and hemodynamic results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Octogenarians are often denied mitral valve (MV) surgery secondary to concerns over increased perioperative morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to examine the outcomes of octogenarians undergoing mitral valve repair (MVr) and replacement (MVR). METHODS: The outcomes of 139 patients between the ages of 80-90 who underwent MVR/MVr between 2004-2018 at the Mazankowski Alberta Heart Institute (Edmonton, AB, Canada) were retrospectively analyzed. Follow-up was extended to a maximum of 15.8 years. RESULTS: Following MVR, all-cause mortality at 30 days, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, and the longest follow-up was 7%, 14%, 36.3%, 61.8%, and 67.7%, respectively. Post-MVr, all-cause mortality at the same time points was 1.9%, 7.6%, 22.5%, 55.5%, and 100%, respectively. During the Hospitalization Index, rates of new-onset atrial fibrillation, sepsis, acute kidney injury, superficial sternal wound infection, deep sternal wound infection, mediastinal bleeding, and permanent pacemaker insertion ranged from 22.1-34.0%, 3.8-11.0%, 7.6-22.0%, 1.9-2.4%, 0-1.2%, 0%, and 0-6.1%, respectively. Rates of overall rehospitalization, as well as readmission for heart failure, stroke, myocardial infarction, and MV reoperation ranged from 71.0-85.5%, 52.2-63.3%, 10.9-22.8%, 1.9-6.0%, and 0% during the follow-up period. There were significant reductions in peak MV gradient (P=0.042) and left ventricular internal diameter in diastole (LVIDd; P=0.008) post-MVR, as well as LVIDd (P<0.001) and Left Atrial (LA) Volume Index (P=0.019) post-MVr. CONCLUSIONS: Octogenarians exhibit positive left atrial and left ventricular remodeling following MVR. Perioperative morbidity is low, late survival is reasonable, and long-term morbidity is considerable. Overall, these results add to the growing literature that MV surgery is relatively safe and effective in octogenarians.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".