• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

经导管主动脉瓣置换术与主动脉瓣无缝线置换术的系统评价和荟萃分析。

A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

机构信息

Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cheju Halla General Hospital, Jeju, Republic of Korea.

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Queen Alia Heart Institute, Amman, Jordan.

出版信息

Ann Thorac Surg. 2018 Sep;106(3):924-929. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.059. Epub 2018 Apr 27.

DOI:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.059
PMID:29709503
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are increasingly adopted methods to treat high-risk patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes between these two recent methods to treat aortic valve disease.

METHODS

We systematically searched multiple databases (January 2000 to October 2016) to identify original studies comparing clinical outcome between SU-AVR and TAVI. End points studied were early mortality, development of paravalvular leak, early stroke, bleeding events, and the need for pacemaker insertion. A random-effect inverse-variance weighted analysis was performed. Event rates were compared as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included seven observational studies comprising 617 SU-AVR and 621 TAVI patients. Early mortality was 2.5% and 5% in the SU-AVR and TAVI cohorts, respectively (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.90; p = 0.02; I = 2%). Postprocedural significant paravalvular leak was much lower after SU-AVR (OR, 0.18l; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.30; p < 0.0001). Postprocedural stroke (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.24 to 2.08; p = 0.53) and the need for pacemaker insertion (OR, 0.884; 95% CI, 0.364 to 2.18; p = 0.7) were comparable between the two cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis of observational studies demonstrates that early mortality is lower after SU-AVR than after TAVI in selected patients. The rates of stroke and pacemaker implant are comparable between procedures; however, the incidence of paravalvular leak is higher after TAVI.

摘要

背景

无缝合主动脉瓣置换术(SU-AVR)和经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)是治疗高危重度主动脉瓣狭窄患者的日益采用的方法。我们进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,以比较这两种治疗主动脉瓣疾病的最新方法的临床结果。

方法

我们系统地搜索了多个数据库(2000 年 1 月至 2016 年 10 月),以确定比较 SU-AVR 和 TAVI 之间临床结果的原始研究。研究的终点为早期死亡率、瓣周漏的发生、早期卒中、出血事件以及需要植入起搏器。采用随机效应逆方差加权分析。事件发生率以比值比(OR)和 95%置信区间(CI)进行比较。

结果

荟萃分析纳入了七项观察性研究,共包括 617 例 SU-AVR 和 621 例 TAVI 患者。SU-AVR 和 TAVI 组的早期死亡率分别为 2.5%和 5%(OR,0.52;95%CI,0.30 至 0.90;p=0.02;I=2%)。SU-AVR 后术后严重瓣周漏的发生率明显降低(OR,0.18;95%CI,0.11 至 0.30;p<0.0001)。术后卒中(OR,0.71;95%CI,0.24 至 2.08;p=0.53)和需要植入起搏器(OR,0.884;95%CI,0.364 至 2.18;p=0.7)在两组之间相似。

结论

我们对观察性研究的荟萃分析表明,在选定的患者中,SU-AVR 后早期死亡率低于 TAVI。两种手术的卒中率和起搏器植入率相当;然而,TAVI 后瓣周漏的发生率更高。

相似文献

1
A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.经导管主动脉瓣置换术与主动脉瓣无缝线置换术的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2018 Sep;106(3):924-929. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.059. Epub 2018 Apr 27.
2
Sutureless aortic valve replacement may improve early mortality compared with transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A meta-analysis of comparative studies.与经导管主动脉瓣植入术相比,无缝合主动脉瓣置换术可能降低早期死亡率:一项比较研究的荟萃分析。
J Cardiol. 2016 Jun;67(6):504-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2015.09.009. Epub 2015 Oct 23.
3
Sutureless versus Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implant: A Propensity Score Matching Study.无缝合与经股动脉经导管主动脉瓣植入术:一项倾向评分匹配研究。
J Heart Valve Dis. 2017 May;26(3):255-261.
4
Immediate outcome after sutureless versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement.无缝合与经导管主动脉瓣置换术后的即刻结果
Heart Vessels. 2016 Mar;31(3):427-33. doi: 10.1007/s00380-014-0623-3. Epub 2015 Jan 9.
5
Sutureless versus transcatheter aortic valves in elderly patients with aortic stenosis at intermediate risk: A multi-institutional study.经导管主动脉瓣与无缝合主动脉瓣在中危老年主动脉瓣狭窄患者中的应用:一项多机构研究。
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2022 Mar;163(3):925-935.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2020.04.179. Epub 2020 Jun 15.
6
Sutureless aortic valve replacement versus transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a meta-analysis of comparative matched studies using propensity score matching.无缝合主动脉瓣置换术与经导管主动脉瓣植入术:一项使用倾向评分匹配的比较配对研究的荟萃分析。
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2018 Feb 1;26(2):202-209. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivx294.
7
Sutureless aortic valve replacement as an alternative treatment for patients belonging to the "gray zone" between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and conventional surgery: a propensity-matched, multicenter analysis.经导管主动脉瓣置换术与传统手术之间“灰色地带”患者的无缝合主动脉瓣置换术作为一种替代治疗方法:倾向匹配、多中心分析。
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012 Nov;144(5):1010-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.07.040. Epub 2012 Sep 10.
8
Conventional surgery, sutureless valves, and transapical aortic valve replacement: what is the best option for patients with aortic valve stenosis? A multicenter, propensity-matched analysis.传统手术、无缝合瓣膜和经心尖主动脉瓣置换术:对于主动脉瓣狭窄患者,哪种方法最佳?一项多中心、倾向评分匹配分析。
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013 Nov;146(5):1065-70; discussion 1070-1. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.06.047. Epub 2013 Sep 8.
9
Effect of severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction on hospital outcome after transcatheter aortic valve implantation or surgical aortic valve replacement: results from a propensity-matched population of the Italian OBSERVANT multicenter study.严重左心室收缩功能障碍对经导管主动脉瓣植入术或外科主动脉瓣置换术后住院结局的影响:来自意大利 OBSERVANT 多中心研究倾向匹配人群的结果。
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 Feb;147(2):568-75. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.10.006. Epub 2013 Nov 19.
10
Sutureless replacement versus transcatheter valve implantation in aortic valve stenosis: a propensity-matched analysis of 2 strategies in high-risk patients.主动脉瓣狭窄中无缝合瓣环置换术与经导管瓣膜植入术的比较:高危患者 2 种策略的倾向性匹配分析。
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 Feb;147(2):561-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.10.025. Epub 2013 Nov 23.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Propensity Score Matching.无缝合主动脉瓣置换术与经导管主动脉瓣植入术的比较:倾向评分匹配的系统评价与荟萃分析
Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024 Nov 4;25(11):391. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2511391. eCollection 2024 Nov.
2
Sutureless Aortic Prosthesis Valves versus Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Intermediate Risk Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis: A Literature Review.严重主动脉瓣狭窄中度风险患者中无缝合主动脉人工瓣膜与经导管主动脉瓣植入术的比较:文献综述
J Clin Med. 2024 Sep 20;13(18):5592. doi: 10.3390/jcm13185592.
3
Heart failure hospitalization following surgical or transcatheter aortic valve implantation in low-risk aortic stenosis.
低危主动脉瓣狭窄患者行主动脉瓣置换术或经导管主动脉瓣植入术后的心衰住院情况。
ESC Heart Fail. 2024 Oct;11(5):2531-2541. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.14887. Epub 2024 Jun 18.
4
The Perceval Sutureless Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve: Evolution of Surgical Valve Technology.经导管主动脉瓣 Perceval 无缝合生物瓣:外科瓣膜技术的演进。
Innovations (Phila). 2024 Mar-Apr;19(2):125-135. doi: 10.1177/15569845241231989. Epub 2024 Mar 11.
5
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement versus Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement: A Single Center Retrospective Cohort Study.经导管主动脉瓣置换术与无缝合主动脉瓣置换术的比较:一项单中心回顾性队列研究。
Yonsei Med J. 2021 Oct;62(10):885-894. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2021.62.10.885.
6
Early and late outcomes after transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in obese patients.肥胖患者经导管与外科主动脉瓣置换术后的早期和晚期结局
Arch Med Sci. 2019 May 21;16(4):796-801. doi: 10.5114/aoms.2019.85253. eCollection 2020.
7
Long-term Survival in Korean Elderly Patients with Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis Who Refused Aortic Valve Replacement.拒绝主动脉瓣置换术的韩国有症状严重主动脉瓣狭窄老年患者的长期生存情况
Korean Circ J. 2019 Feb;49(2):160-169. doi: 10.4070/kcj.2018.0208. Epub 2018 Oct 26.