ATS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Birkmeyer, N. J.O.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Birkmeyer, N. J.O.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article

Ann Thorac Surg 2001;72:1795-1796
© 2001 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons


Correspondence

Simulation techniques to support prosthetic valve choice in aortic valve replacement: Reply

Nancy J.O. Birkmeyer, PhDa

a Department of Surgery (HB7800), Dartmouth Medical School, One Medical Center Dr, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA

e-mail: nancy.j.hirkmeyer{at}dartmouth.edu

To the Editor

Given the complex nature of their underlying models and assumptions, independent validation greatly enhances the value of clinical decision analyses. In this regard, we appreciate the efforts of Takkenberg and colleagues in validating our findings.

Takkenberg and associates also use sensitivity analysis to underscore the importance of assumptions about excess mortality (relative to the general population) in patients undergoing valve replacement. Whether to use additive (as we did in our analysis) or multiplicative models is a matter of some debate [1]. Takkenberg and coworkers have shown that applying a multiplicative model substantially reduces life expectancy estimates in patients under 70. The net effect is to increase the apparent benefit of tissue valves and reduce the age at which tissue valves are preferred over mechanical valves. In our analysis, the decision was similarly sensitive to varying estimates for a number of input variables for patients between the ages of 60 and 70.

Even with different assumptions, however, both of our analyses reach a similar conclusion: A large proportion of the patients who are currently receiving mechanical valves would do better with tissue valves.

References

  1. Kuntz K., Weinstein M. Life expectancy biases in clinical decision modeling. Med Decis Making 1995;15:158-169.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Related Article

Simulation techniques to support prosthetic valve choice in aortic valve replacement
Johanna J.M. Takkenberg, Marinus J.C. Eijkemans, and Ewout W. Steyerberg
Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2001 72: 1795. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Birkmeyer, N. J.O.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Birkmeyer, N. J.O.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article


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