The feasibility and long-term outcomes of mitral valve (MV) repair in patients with infective endocarditis (IE) remain unclear. Using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database, we identified 1999 patients who underwent MV surgery for IE during 2000 to 2013. The patients were more likely to have undergone valve replacement (1575 patients; 78.8%) than valve repair (424 patients; 21.2%). After 1:1 propensity score matching, 352 patients in each group were included for analysis. Perioperative outcomes and late composite end points, comprising all-cause mortality, MV reoperation, any stroke, major bleeding, and readmission for heart failure, were compared. Patients who received MV repair had fewer perioperative complications, lower in-hospital mortality rates (6.3% vs 10.8%; P = .031), and lower risks of late mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.80), and composite end point (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.87) during a mean follow-up of 4.8 years. Subgroup analysis revealed a trend in which the beneficial effect of MV repair was not apparent when surgeries were performed in hospitals within the lowest volume quartile (P for interaction = .091). In patients who underwent surgery during active IE, MV repair was also related to a lower rate of late mortality (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48-0.85). Mitral repair for IE has better perioperative and late outcomes than mitral replacement. Mitral repair performed by an experienced team is recommended for IE patients instead of MV replacement whenever possible, even with an active infection status.

Background: Surgery for tricuspid valve ( TV ) diseases is associated with poor prognosis, but few studies have described the long‐term outcomes by comparing TV repair and replacement in isolated and concomitant TV surgeries separately. Methods and Results: Between 2000 and 2013, adult patients who underwent TV repair or replacement surgeries were identified from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Outcomes of interest included all‐cause mortality, composite outcome, and readmission attributable to any cause. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to reduce confounding effects. A total of 2644 patients with a mean follow‐up of 4.9 years were included. Of them, 12.6% and 87.4% underwent isolated and concomitant TV surgery, respectively. The in‐hospital mortality rates for isolated and concomitant TV surgery were 8.7% and 8.6%, respectively, whereas all‐cause mortality rates were 41.7% and 36.8%, respectively. Compared with TV replacement, TV repair demonstrated significantly lower risks of all‐cause mortality (concomitant: hazard ratio [ HR ], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59–0.99), composite outcome (isolated: subdistribution HR , 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35–0.89; concomitant: subdistribution HR , 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46–0.86), and readmission (isolated: subdistribution HR , 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46–0.91; concomitant: subdistribution HR , 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60–0.86), except insignificant difference in all‐cause mortality in isolated surgery. Conclusions: Compared with replacement, TV repair is associated with better short‐ and long‐term outcomes in both isolated and concomitant TV surgery. However, further prospective clinical trials are warranted.

Traumatic thoracic aortic injury (TAI) is the second-leading cause of death among trauma patients.^1,2 Baker et al³ and Trunkey⁴ defined the timing of trauma deaths as a trimodal distribution in urban environments in the United States; the distribution of death after traumatic injury can be characterized by 3 periods. Approximately 50% of deaths occur immediately (minutes), usually owing to severe neurological injury or frank rupture of a great vessel. The second peak of approximately 30% of deaths occurs early (hours), which is preventable death in modern trauma care—some call it the “golden hour.” The remaining 20% of deaths occurs late (weeks), secondary to sepsis or multiple organ failure.

Background and Purpose: Data on clinical outcomes for nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOACs) and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer are limited, and patients with active cancer were excluded from randomized trials. We investigated the effectiveness and safety for NOACs versus warfarin among patients with atrial fibrillation with cancer. Methods: In this nationwide retrospective cohort study from Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database, we identified a total of 6274 and 1681 consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation with cancer taking NOACs and warfarin from June 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017, respectively. Propensity score stabilized weighting was used to balance covariates across study groups. Results: There were 1031, 1758, 411, and 3074 patients treated with apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban, respectively. After propensity score stabilized weighting, NOAC was associated with a lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.50–0.80]; P =0.0001), major adverse limb events (hazard ratio, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.24–0.70]; P =0.0010), venous thrombosis (hazard ratio, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.23–0.61]; P 0.05). When compared with warfarin, NOAC was associated with lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular event, and venous thrombosis in patients aged <75 but not in those aged ≥75 years ( P interaction <0.05). Conclusions: Thromboprophylaxis with NOACs rather than warfarin should be considered for the majority of the atrial fibrillation population with cancer.