Table 5 The impact of aortic valve treatment on clinical outcomes.

From: Clinical outcomes and management strategies for moderate aortic regurgitation in patients undergoing rheumatic mitral valve surgery

Groups

More-than-mild AVD during follow-up

Death or cardiac reoperation after surgery

RR

(95%CI)

P value

Adjusted RR

(95%CI)

P value

HR

(95%CI)

P value

Adjusted HR

(95%CI)

P value

AVP vs. NT

0.91

(0.53–1.53)

0.73

0.87

(0.49–1.50)

0.62

1.31

(0.38–4.54)

0.67

1.38

(0.38–4.91)

0.62

AVR vs. NT

0.34

(0.19–0.54)

< 0.001

0.41

(0.21–0.68)

0.002

1.13

(0.64–1.99)

0.67

1.59

(0.82–3.08)

0.17

AVR vs. AVP

0.13

(0.04–0.34)

< 0.001

0.14

(0.04–0.43)

0.002

1.12

(0.38–3.36)

0.84

2.03

(0.53–7.72)

0.30

  1. NT, non-surgical treatment; AVP, aortic valvuloplasty; AVR, aortic valve replacement; RR, relative risk; HR, hazard ratio; AVD, aortic valve dysfunction. Adjusted RR or HR was adjusted for age, gender, aortic stenosis, aortic valve calcification, preoperative left ventricular end-diastolic dimension, and mitral valve repair.
Back to article page