Health and Well-Being in Surviving Congenital Heart Disease Patients: An Umbrella Review With Synthesis of Best Evidence

BACKGROUND: Advances in the management of congenital heart disease (CHD) patients have enabled improvement in long-term survival even for those with serious defects. Research priorities (for patients, families and clinicians) have shifted from a focus on how to improve survival to exploring long-term outcomes in patients with CHD. A comprehensive appraisal of available evidence could inform best practice to maximize health and well-being, and identify research gaps to direct further research toward patient and clinical need. We aimed to critically appraise all available published systematic reviews of health and well-being outcomes in adult patients with CHD. METHODS: We conducted an umbrella review, including any systematic reviews that assessed the association of having vs. not having CHD with any long-term health (physical or mental), social (e.g., education, occupation) or well-being [e.g., quality of life (QoL)] outcome in adulthood (≥18-years). RESULTS: Out of 1330 articles screened, we identified five systematic reviews of associations of CHD with adult outcomes. All but one (which studied QoL) explored health outcomes: one cardiovascular, two mental, and one mortality after transplant. CHD patients had a higher risk of stroke, coronary heart disease and heart failure, with the pooled relative risk (RR) for any outcome of 3.12 (95% CI: 3.01 to 3.24), with substantial heterogeneity (I(2) = 99%) explained by the outcome being studied (stronger association for heart failure) and geography (stronger in Europe compared with other regions). CHD patients had a higher risk of anxiety (OR = 2.58 (1.45 to 4.59)], and higher mean scores for depression/anxiety symptoms (difference in means = −0.11 SD (–0.28 to 0.06), I(2) = 94%)]. Compared with patients having a cardiac transplant for other (non-CHD) diseases, CHD patients had higher short-term mortality (RR at 30-days post-transplant = 2.18 [1.62 to 2.93)], with moderate heterogeneity (I(2) = 41%) explained by previous surgery (higher mortality with prior Fontan/Glenn operation). All domains of QoL were lower in patients with Fontan’s circulation than non-CHD adults. CONCLUSION: Adults with CHD have poorer cardiovascular, mental health and QoL outcomes, and higher short-term mortality after transplant. The paucity of systematic reviews, in particular for outcomes such as education, occupation and lifestyles, highlights the need for this to be made a priority by funders and researchers. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: [www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero], identifier [CRD42020175034]

Disparity in clinical outcomes after cardiac surgery between private and public (NHS) payers in England

Background: there is little known about how payer status impacts clinical outcomes in a universal single-payer system such as the UK National Health Service (NHS). The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between payer status (private or public) and clinical outcomes following cardiac surgery from NHS providers in England. Methods: the National Adult Cardiac Surgery Audit (NACSA) registry was interrogated for patients who underwent adult cardiac surgery in England from 2009 to 2018. Information on socioeconomic status were provided by linkage with the Iteration of the English Indices of Deprivation (IoD). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included incidence of in-hospital postoperative cerebrovascular accident (CVA), renal dialysis, sternal wound infection, and re-exploration. To assess whether payer status was an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality, binomial generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) were fitted along with 17 items forming the EuroSCORE and the IoD domains. Findings: the final sample consisted of 280,209 patients who underwent surgery in 31 NHS hospitals in England from 2009 to 2018. Of them, 5,967 (2.1%) and 274,242 (97.9%) were private and NHS payers respectively. Private payer status was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.79; 95%CI 0.65 – 0.97;P = 0.026), CVA (OR 0.77; 95%CI 0.60 – 0.99; P = 0.039), need for re-exploration (OR 0.84; 95%CI 0.72 – 0.97; P = 0.017) and with non-significant lower risk of dialysis (OR 0.84; 95%CI 0.69 – 1.02; P = 0.074). Private payer status was found to be independently associated with lower risk of in-hospital mortality in the elective subgroup (OR 0.76; 95%CI 0.61 – 0.96; P = 0.020) but not in the non-elective subgroup (OR 1.01; 95%CI 0.64 – 1.58; P = 0.976). Interpretation: In conclusion, using a national database, we have found evidence of significant beneficial effect of payer status on hospital outcomes following cardiac surgery in favour of private payers regardless their socioeconomic factors.</p

External validation of the improving partial risk adjustment in surgery (PRAIS-2) model for 30-day mortality after paediatric cardiac surgery

Objective Independent temporal external validation of the improving partial risk adjustment in surgery model (PRAIS-2) to predict 30-day mortality in patients undergoing paediatric cardiac surgery.Design Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data.Setting Paediatric cardiac surgery.Intervention PRAIS-2 validation was carried out using a two temporally different single centre (Bristol, UK) cohorts: Cohort 1 surgery undertaken from April 2004 to March 2009 and Cohort 2 from April 2015 to July 2019. For each subject PRAIS-2 score was calculated according to the original formula.Participants A total of 1352 (2004-2009) and 1197 (2015-2019) paediatric cardiac surgical procedures were included in the Cohort 1 and Cohort 2, respectively (median age at the procedure 6.3 and 7.1 months).Primary and secondary outcome measures PRAIS-2 performance was assessed in terms of discrimination by means of ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curve analysis and calibration by using the calibration belt method.Results PRAIS-2 score showed excellent discrimination for both cohorts (AUC 0.72 (95%CI: 0.65 to 0.80) and 0.88 (95%CI: 0.82 to 0.93), respectively). While PRAIS-2 was only marginally calibrated in Cohort 1, with a tendency to underestimate risk in lowrisk and overestimate risk in high risk procedures (P-value = 0.033), validation in Cohort 2 showed good calibration with the 95% confidence belt containing the bisector for predicted mortality (P-value = 0.143). We also observed good prediction accuracy in the non-elective procedures (N = 483;AUC 0.78 (95%CI 0.68 to 0.87); Calibration belt containing the bisector (P-value=0.589).Conclusions In a single centre UK-based cohort, PRAIS-2 showed excellent discrimination and calibration in predicting 30-day mortality in paediatric cardiac surgery including in those undergoing non-elective procedures. Our results support a wider adoption of PRAIS-2 score in the clinical practice