|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ann Thorac Surg 2000;70:783-784
© 2000 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons
Discussion
DR HOOSHANG BOLOOKI (Miami, FL): This is a very nice study, Dr Thourani. Congratulations. As I understood from your presentation, if you operated as an "emergency," you had between 20% and 40% more cost and mortality, respectively. As I see it, it all comes down to the definition of "emergency." There are a lot of emergencies, as you know, which involve time constraints and cardiologist or family requests at times disregarding the clinical or pathologic presentation of the patient. Were there some patients that could have had their operation on an elective schedule?
I also noted that patients needing emergency mitral valve surgery and coronary operation urgently had a 40% operative mortality, which is almost similar with past reports. It is possible that nonurgent operations in these patients would have resulted in better outcomes. I appreciate your comments. Thank you.
DR THOURANI: Doctor Bolooki, thank you for those insightful questions. The Emory University Cardiac Surgery Database defines urgent operations as those requiring surgical intervention within 24 hours of presenting to our cardiac surgeons. Emergent operations are defined as those cases in which the patient is taken directly to the operating room. Although the group of Emory surgeons
Related Article
Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2000 70: 778-783.
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |