The durability of rheumatic mitral valve repair in the current era has improved and is comparable to the outstanding durability of repairs for degenerative disease, even in the adult rheumatic population. Modifications of standard repair techniques, adherence to the importance of good leaflet coaptation, and strict quality control with stringent use of intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography have all contributed to the improved long-term results.
The durability of MV repair for rheumatic disease in the current era has improved and is comparable with the outstanding durability of repairs for degenerative disease. Modifications of standard repair techniques, adherence to the importance of good leaflet coaptation and strict quality control with stringent use of intraoperative transoesophageal echocardiography have all contributed to the improved long-term results.
Repair with leaflet extension in rheumatic disease resulted in good early and mid-term outcomes. A wider utilization of this technique may increase the feasibility and durability of repair in complex rheumatic mitral valve disease.
MV repair can be successfully applied to both congenital and acquired MV disease in children. Aggressive repair techniques and avoidance of residual MR have improved durability and survival.
Twenty-three years of follow-up shows that MV repair is superior to MMVR in children with RHD. Hence, the rheumatic MV should be repaired when technically feasible to maximize the survival and reduce the valve-related morbidity with comparable durability to MMVR.
Background
The Short Form 36 (SF-36) is a scoring system comprising of 36 items categorized into eight constructs corresponding to patients’ health-related quality of life.
It has been used extensively in various countries on different sub-populations and used to indicate the health status and help to ascertain the effect of clinical interventions on the particular population.
Objective
To examine the psychometric properties of the Malay version of SF-36 (Malay SF-36) summated rating scales and validate the scale among post-coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG) patients at the National Heart Institute (IJN), Kuala Lumpur.
Methods
Five hundred and nine post-CABG patients at the IJN, Malaysia completed the questionnaires between 1 July and 31 December 2017. Psychometric tests endorsed by the “International Quality of Life Assessment Project” were utilised.
Results
The data quality was excellent with a high questionnaire completion rate (100%). As hypothesized, the ordering of item means within scales was clustered. In unison, scaling assumptions were satisfied. Good discriminant validity was shown between subsets of patients with various levels of health status. Notwithstanding, there were probably translation issues of the Physical Functioning scale which showed small ceiling effects. We clearly observed high ceiling and floor effects in both Role Physical and Role Emotional scale most probably attributed to the dichotomous style of their choice of responses. Cronbach alpha values of the eight scales ranged from 0.73 to 0.90, showing good internal consistency reliability. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) confirmed the 8-factor solution and Composite Reliability revealed internal consistency reliability except for Vitality and Social Functioning. Based on the Average Variance Extracted (AVE), convergent validity was adequate except for two domains. Discriminant Validity is good for the eight constructs as the √AVE are generally higher than the correlation coefficients between the latent constructs.
Conclusion
The scoring for the Malay SF-36 based on the summated ratings method was proven to be valid to be applied in our local clinical population. The CFA, fitness estimates, reliability and validity assessments suggest that the Malay version of SF36 is a valid and reliable instrument. However, further work is warranted to further refine the convergent validity and reliability of some scales.
Background
Ever since COVID-19 was declared a pandemic, the world medical landscape has changed dramatically. As cardiac surgeons we not only have the duty to protect our patients and staff from COVID-19 infection, but we are also tasked with the responsibility to ensure those cardiovascular patients awaiting surgery are not harmed from an extended delay in surgery as the world comes to a halt from COVID-19. Currently there is limited literature on the outcome of cardiac surgery in the pre-operative Covid positive group. In this study we aim to assess the safety and outcome of patients undergoing cardiac surgery following Covid-19 infection.
Patients and methods
This was a single centre retrospective observational study. All patients undergoing open heart surgery at Institut Jantung Negara from June 2020 to July 2021 were included in this study. Patients who were Covid positive pre-operatively were identified. Data from patient medical records collected contemporaneously were reviewed and analysed, supplemented by telephone call interviews after discharge.
Results
2368 patients underwent open heart surgery from June 2020 until July 2021 in our centre. Of these, 0.5% (12 patients) were identified as Covid positive pre-operatively. Mean age of patients were 59.1 ± 14.8 years old. Mean Ejection Fraction was 46.4 ± 12.9. Most patients (75%) were asymptomatic with covid infection and only one patient were admitted to hospital for Covid infection. Mean duration from Covid PCR positive swab to surgery were 46.3 ± 32.7days. Most of the patients (66.7%) underwent operation on an emergency or urgent basis. Median time to extubation was 1 day. Median ICU length of stay was 1 day. 25% patients required non-invasive ventilation post-operatively and one patient was discharged home on long term oxygen therapy. There were 2 deaths- none of which were covid related mortality.
Conclusion
Cardiac surgery could be performed safely in patients with pre-operative Covid-19 infection after a period of recovery, especially in the asymptomatic to mild category of infection. Multi-disciplinary team approach may be useful in deciding the timing of surgery for complex cases.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.