OBJECTIVEDiabetes is a common cause of shortened life expectancy. We aimed to assess the association between diabetes and cause-specific death. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSWe used the pooled analysis of individual data from 12 Spanish population cohorts with 10-year follow-up. Participants had no previous history of cardiovascular diseases and were 35-79 years old. Diabetes status was self-reported or defined as glycemia >125 mg/dL at baseline. Vital status and causes of death were ascertained by medical records review and linkage with the official death registry. The hazard ratios and cumulative mortality function were assessed with two approaches, with and without competing risks: proportional subdistribution hazard (PSH) and cause-specific hazard (CSH), respectively. Multivariate analyses were fitted for cardiovascular, cancer, and noncardiovascular noncancer deaths. RESULTSWe included 55,292 individuals (15.6% with diabetes and overall mortality of 9.1%). The adjusted hazard ratios showed that diabetes increased mortality risk: 1) cardiovascular death, CSH = 2.03 (95% CI 1.63-2.52) and PSH = 1.99 (1.60-2.49) in men; and CSH = 2.28 (1.75-2.97) and PSH = 2.23 (1.70-2.91) in women; 2) cancer death, CSH = 1.37 (1.13-1.67) and PSH = 1.35 (1.10-1.65) in men; and CSH = 1.68 (1.29-2.20) and PSH = 1.66 (1.25-2.19) in women; and 3) noncardiovascular noncancer death, CSH = 1.53 (1.23-1.91) and PSH = 1.50 (1.20-1.89) in men; and CSH = 1.89 (1.43-2.48) and PSH = 1.84 (1.39-2.45) in women. In all instances, the cumulative mortality function was significantly higher in individuals with diabetes. CONCLUSIONSDiabetes is associated with premature death from cardiovascular disease, cancer, and noncardiovascular noncancer causes. The use of CSH and PSH provides a comprehensive view of mortality dynamics in a population with diabetes.Diabetes constitutes a worldwide public health problem (1) that affected 382 million people (8.3% of the world's population) in 2013 (2). Recent projections suggest that this prevalence is likely to increase in the next 20 years, affecting 592 million people (10.1%) in 2035. In Spain, diabetes affects 13.8% of individuals older than 18 years and is more prevalent in men than in women (3,4).The average life expectancy of a 50-year-old individual with diabetes is 6 years shorter than it would be without the disease (5). Diabetes not only doubles or

No abstract

Objectives Aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with small aortic annulus (diameter ≤21 mm) is considered a challenging scenario because of technical aspects and the high risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM). The choice of the appropriate prosthesis is crucial, and at the moment, an ideal device has yet to be identified. We compare clinical and hemodynamic results after AVR with three bioprostheses with different design and characteristics. Methods We retrospectively evaluated 76 consecutive patients from two cardiac surgery centers who underwent AVR (Trifecta = 24; Edwards INTUITY Elite valve system = 26, and Perceval = 26) for severe aortic stenosis between 2013 and 2017. Patients selected were older than 75 years and with an annulus diameter ≤21 mm at preoperative echocardiogram. Reinterventions and combined procedures were excluded. Minimally invasive AVR was performed in 44 (57.8%) patients. Telephonic interview was obtained at 2.9 ± 0.5 years and echocardiographic follow-up at 2.2 ± 0.8 years. Results Clinical outcome was similar in the three groups. At follow-up, Trifecta patients presented significantly higher peak and mean transprosthetic pressure gradients ( P = 0.04 and 0.01). Effective orifice area and left ventricular mass regression were comparable, although an advantage was observed in Perceval patients without reaching the statistical significance. Incidence of moderate ( P = 0.2) and severe PPM ( P = 0.7) was comparable. Conclusions Despite higher postoperative pressure gradients observed with the Trifecta valve, all three prostheses (Trifecta, Edwards INTUITY Elite, and Perceval) have proven to be reliable when implanted in small aortic annuli, with good clinical outcome and favorable left ventricular mass regression.

No abstract