Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objectives: History of prior cardiac surgery has traditionally been considered a risk factor for subsequent cardiac procedures. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of patients implanted with a left ventricular assist device via redo sternotomy.
Methods: Prospectively collected data were reviewed for all patients implanted with a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device at a single institution from December 2006 through June 2018. Patients were separated into 2 cohorts: those with a history of prior cardiac surgery (redo sternotomy) and those undergoing primary sternotomy at the time of left ventricular assist device implantation. The primary outcome was overall survival.
Results: Of the 321 patients included in the study, 77 (24%) were implanted via redo sternotomy and 244 (76%) via primary sternotomy. The redo sternotomy cohort was generally older (59 ± 10 vs 57 ± 12 years, P = 0.050) and had a higher incidence of ischaemic disease (70% vs 49%, P = 0.002). The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated that overall survival was not significantly different between the redo sternotomy and primary sternotomy groups (6-month survival: 86% vs 92%; 5-year survival: 53% vs 51%; log-rank P = 0.590 for overall difference during follow-up). The propensity score analysis consistently showed that redo sternotomy was not significantly associated with mortality risk (hazard ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.73-1.93; P = 0.488). Redo sternotomy patients were more likely to require rehospitalization during their first year postoperatively (P = 0.020) and spent less time out of the hospital during the first year (P = 0.046).
Conclusions: The redo sternotomy cohort represents a more technically challenging patient population, but overall survival similar to that of primary sternotomy patients can be achieved.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivaa055 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!