EDITORIAL
Editorial comments on ‘‘Mitral Valve Replacement for Mitral Stenosis: 15 years Single Center Experience’’
T
he strengths of this manuscript are embedded
in the exemplary long term follow-up and its depiction. Indeed an analysis of surgical results without a confrontation with the late results makes no sense. Their method of follow-up is through phone contact. This is very labor intensive. Luckily software has now been made available that can automate follow-up using encrypted repetitive on-line tools. This reporting could have been further improved by describing the actuarial method used: anniversary or common closing date and the completeness obtained. The type of pathology and the associated rarity confronts the authors with some additional unavoidable difficulties. The authors have tried to address the issue of variability between
DOI of original article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsha.2016.02.007
datasets by using multivariate analysis, but the limited size of the dataset and luckily limited number of events makes any approach towards correction for variability very difficult with this pathology, this prevalence of events and for a single institution. Paul Sergeant MD PhD a,b a SERREY Consulting b
MEPLIS, Belgium E-mail address: [email protected] a,b
Available online 24 March 2016
P.O. Box 2925 Riyadh – 11461KSA Tel: +966 1 2520088 ext 40151 Fax: +966 1 2520718 Email: [email protected] URL: www.sha.org.sa
1016–7315 Ó 2016 The Author. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University. This is an open access article under the CC BYNC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer review under responsibility of King Saud University. URL: www.ksu.edu.sa http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsha.2016.03.002
Production and hosting by Elsevier
Editorial comments on ‘‘Mitral Valve Replacement for Mitral Stenosis: 15 years Single Center Experience’’
T
he strengths of this manuscript are embedded
in the exemplary long term follow-up and its depiction. Indeed an analysis of surgical results without a confrontation with the late results makes no sense. Their method of follow-up is through phone contact. This is very labor intensive. Luckily software has now been made available that can automate follow-up using encrypted repetitive on-line tools. This reporting could have been further improved by describing the actuarial method used: anniversary or common closing date and the completeness obtained. The type of pathology and the associated rarity confronts the authors with some additional unavoidable difficulties. The authors have tried to address the issue of variability between
DOI of original article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsha.2016.02.007
datasets by using multivariate analysis, but the limited size of the dataset and luckily limited number of events makes any approach towards correction for variability very difficult with this pathology, this prevalence of events and for a single institution. Paul Sergeant MD PhD a,b a SERREY Consulting b
MEPLIS, Belgium E-mail address: [email protected] a,b
Available online 24 March 2016
P.O. Box 2925 Riyadh – 11461KSA Tel: +966 1 2520088 ext 40151 Fax: +966 1 2520718 Email: [email protected] URL: www.sha.org.sa
1016–7315 Ó 2016 The Author. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University. This is an open access article under the CC BYNC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer review under responsibility of King Saud University. URL: www.ksu.edu.sa http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsha.2016.03.002
Production and hosting by Elsevier
