|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2006;30:954
© 2006 Elsevier Science NL
Letters to the Editor |
a Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ont., Canada
b Department of Epidemiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ont., Canada
Received 11 September 2006; accepted 15 September 2006.
* Corresponding author. Address: University of Ottawa Heart Institute, 40 Ruskin Street, Suite 3403, Ottawa, Ont., Canada K1Y 4W7. Tel.: +1 613 761 4893; fax: +1 613 761 4713. (Email: mruel{at}ottawaheart.ca).
Key Words: Aortic valve replacement Mitral valve replacement Heart valve Bioprosthesis Mechanical Outcomes (includes mortality morbidity)
We thank Wu and Grunkemeier for their insightful comments [1] regarding our manuscript that compared mechanical and bioprosthetic valve replacement in middle-aged patients [2]. Cumulative incidence (actual) analysis is an important statistical technique for use in the analysis of events other than death after valve replacement, and we have employed this technique in our previous work [3]. Drs Wu and Grunkemeier are to be applauded for their pioneering work in this field [4].
In studying the outcomes after valve replacement in middle-aged patients, we performed both actuarial and cumulative incidence (actual) analysis. However, we chose to present only the actuarial analysis in the final manuscript for several reasons. Firstly, we are aware of the recent string of editorials and letters to the editor passionately debating the use of cumulative incidence (actual) analysis. Two other prominent cardiac surgery journals have issued a moratorium on the publication of actual freedom results [5]. Secondly, as Drs Wu and Grunkemeier have pointed out, the difference between the results from actuarial and cumulative incidence (actual) analysis increases as the age of the cohort increases [4]. Thus, for a relatively young (middle-age) population with a low competing risk of death, we believe that employing only actuarial analysis is generally sufficient. Finally, but most importantly, both the actuarial and cumulative incidence (actual) techniques led to similar results and conclusions in this study. Therefore, for the purpose of simplicity, and in order to avoid the controversial debate, we reported only the actuarial analysis in the manuscript.
References
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 |