How much follow-up do patients need after repair of acyanotic heart disease?

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

It remains unproven that scheduled follow-up after repair of acyanotic heart defects actually prolongs life or improves its quality. However, postoperative patients do occasionally encounter late complications that, when recognized, can be treated effectively. Scheduled follow-up probably maximizes the early recognition and treatment of late postoperative problems. Each repaired defect has a best-case scenario for long-term course, in which late complications are relatively unlikely. The best cases after repair of certain lesions, for example patent ductus arteriosus, carry negligible potential for deterioration and so benefit less from frequent technologically intensive follow-up than others, such as aortic stenosis, that have greater potential for deterioration. Residual hemodynamic or electrophysiologic problems (including pulmonary or systemic hypertension, residual valvular insufficiency or stenosis, heart failure, atrioventricular block, or tachyarrhythmias) identify some patients as special cases who deviate from the best-case scenario in ways that make deterioration more likely. Although best cases can usually be followed infrequently with minimal technologic support, special cases require more active management to optimize their outcome, so they should benefit from more frequent and extensive scheduled follow-up. Failure to appreciate the heterogeneity of follow-up needs among patients who share the same preoperative diagnosis can lead to inappropriately standardized levels of postoperative surveillance, providing too much for some and not enough for others.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3-12
Number of pages10
JournalCardiology in review
Volume4
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1996

Fingerprint

Heart Diseases
Patent Ductus Arteriosus
Atrioventricular Block
Aortic Valve Stenosis
Tachycardia
Pathologic Constriction
Heart Failure
Hemodynamics
Hypertension
Lung
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • adults
  • children
  • complications
  • congenital heart disease
  • infants
  • surgery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

How much follow-up do patients need after repair of acyanotic heart disease? / Danford, David Alan.

In: Cardiology in review, Vol. 4, No. 1, 01.01.1996, p. 3-12.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{3d18ab35ae324b22aaf19e845dc8b681,
title = "How much follow-up do patients need after repair of acyanotic heart disease?",
abstract = "It remains unproven that scheduled follow-up after repair of acyanotic heart defects actually prolongs life or improves its quality. However, postoperative patients do occasionally encounter late complications that, when recognized, can be treated effectively. Scheduled follow-up probably maximizes the early recognition and treatment of late postoperative problems. Each repaired defect has a best-case scenario for long-term course, in which late complications are relatively unlikely. The best cases after repair of certain lesions, for example patent ductus arteriosus, carry negligible potential for deterioration and so benefit less from frequent technologically intensive follow-up than others, such as aortic stenosis, that have greater potential for deterioration. Residual hemodynamic or electrophysiologic problems (including pulmonary or systemic hypertension, residual valvular insufficiency or stenosis, heart failure, atrioventricular block, or tachyarrhythmias) identify some patients as special cases who deviate from the best-case scenario in ways that make deterioration more likely. Although best cases can usually be followed infrequently with minimal technologic support, special cases require more active management to optimize their outcome, so they should benefit from more frequent and extensive scheduled follow-up. Failure to appreciate the heterogeneity of follow-up needs among patients who share the same preoperative diagnosis can lead to inappropriately standardized levels of postoperative surveillance, providing too much for some and not enough for others.",
keywords = "adults, children, complications, congenital heart disease, infants, surgery",
author = "Danford, {David Alan}",
year = "1996",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/00045415-199601000-00005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
pages = "3--12",
journal = "Cardiology in Review",
issn = "1061-5377",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How much follow-up do patients need after repair of acyanotic heart disease?

AU - Danford, David Alan

PY - 1996/1/1

Y1 - 1996/1/1

N2 - It remains unproven that scheduled follow-up after repair of acyanotic heart defects actually prolongs life or improves its quality. However, postoperative patients do occasionally encounter late complications that, when recognized, can be treated effectively. Scheduled follow-up probably maximizes the early recognition and treatment of late postoperative problems. Each repaired defect has a best-case scenario for long-term course, in which late complications are relatively unlikely. The best cases after repair of certain lesions, for example patent ductus arteriosus, carry negligible potential for deterioration and so benefit less from frequent technologically intensive follow-up than others, such as aortic stenosis, that have greater potential for deterioration. Residual hemodynamic or electrophysiologic problems (including pulmonary or systemic hypertension, residual valvular insufficiency or stenosis, heart failure, atrioventricular block, or tachyarrhythmias) identify some patients as special cases who deviate from the best-case scenario in ways that make deterioration more likely. Although best cases can usually be followed infrequently with minimal technologic support, special cases require more active management to optimize their outcome, so they should benefit from more frequent and extensive scheduled follow-up. Failure to appreciate the heterogeneity of follow-up needs among patients who share the same preoperative diagnosis can lead to inappropriately standardized levels of postoperative surveillance, providing too much for some and not enough for others.

AB - It remains unproven that scheduled follow-up after repair of acyanotic heart defects actually prolongs life or improves its quality. However, postoperative patients do occasionally encounter late complications that, when recognized, can be treated effectively. Scheduled follow-up probably maximizes the early recognition and treatment of late postoperative problems. Each repaired defect has a best-case scenario for long-term course, in which late complications are relatively unlikely. The best cases after repair of certain lesions, for example patent ductus arteriosus, carry negligible potential for deterioration and so benefit less from frequent technologically intensive follow-up than others, such as aortic stenosis, that have greater potential for deterioration. Residual hemodynamic or electrophysiologic problems (including pulmonary or systemic hypertension, residual valvular insufficiency or stenosis, heart failure, atrioventricular block, or tachyarrhythmias) identify some patients as special cases who deviate from the best-case scenario in ways that make deterioration more likely. Although best cases can usually be followed infrequently with minimal technologic support, special cases require more active management to optimize their outcome, so they should benefit from more frequent and extensive scheduled follow-up. Failure to appreciate the heterogeneity of follow-up needs among patients who share the same preoperative diagnosis can lead to inappropriately standardized levels of postoperative surveillance, providing too much for some and not enough for others.

KW - adults

KW - children

KW - complications

KW - congenital heart disease

KW - infants

KW - surgery

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029979273&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029979273&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00045415-199601000-00005

DO - 10.1097/00045415-199601000-00005

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:0029979273

VL - 4

SP - 3

EP - 12

JO - Cardiology in Review

JF - Cardiology in Review

SN - 1061-5377

IS - 1

ER -