Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, SP - Brazil.
Hospital do Coração (HCOR), São Paulo, SP - Brazil.
Arq Bras Cardiol. 2019 Mar;112(3):292-301. doi: 10.5935/abc.20180272. Epub 2019 Jan 7.
The choice of a mechanical (MP) or biological prosthesis (BP) for patients with valvular heart disease undergoing replacement is still not a consensus.
We aimed to determine the clinical outcomes of MP or BP placement in those patients.
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared biological prostheses and mechanical prostheses in patients with valvular heart diseases and assessed the outcomes. RCTs were searched in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL, SCOPUS and Web of Science (from inception to November 2014) databases. Meta-analyses were performed using inverse variance with random effects models. The GRADE system was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A P-value lower than 0.05 was considered significant.
A total of four RCTs were included in the meta-analyses (1,528 patients) with follow up ranging from 2 to 20 years. Three used old generation mechanical and biological prostheses, and one used contemporary prostheses. No significant difference in mortality was found between BP and MP patients (risk ratio (RR = 1.07; 95% CI 0.99-1.15). The risk of bleeding was significantly lower in BP patients than MP patients (RR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.52-0.78); however, reoperations were significantly more frequent in BP patients (RR = 3.60; 95% CI 2.44-5.32). There were no statistically significant differences between BP and MP patients with respect to systemic arterial embolisms and infective endocarditis (RR = 0.93; 95% CI 0.66-1.31, RR = 1.21; CI95% 0.78-1.88, respectively). Results in the trials with modern and old prostheses were similar.
The mortality rate and the risk of thromboembolic events and endocarditis were similar between BP and MP patients. The risk of bleeding was approximately one third lower for BP patients than for MP patients, while the risk of reoperations was more than three times higher for BP patients.
在患有心脏瓣膜病并需要进行置换的患者中,选择机械(MP)或生物(BP)假体仍然没有达成共识。
我们旨在确定这些患者中 MP 或 BP 放置的临床结果。
我们对比较心脏瓣膜病患者中生物假体和机械假体的随机对照试验(RCT)进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,并评估了结果。在 MEDLINE、EMBASE、LILACS、CENTRAL、SCOPUS 和 Web of Science(从成立到 2014 年 11 月)数据库中搜索 RCTs。使用逆方差和随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。使用 GRADE 系统来评估证据质量。P 值低于 0.05 被认为具有统计学意义。
荟萃分析共纳入 4 项 RCT(1528 例患者),随访时间从 2 年到 20 年不等。其中 3 项研究使用了旧一代的机械和生物假体,1 项研究使用了当代假体。BP 和 MP 患者之间的死亡率没有显著差异(风险比(RR)=1.07;95%CI 0.99-1.15)。BP 患者的出血风险显著低于 MP 患者(RR=0.64;95%CI 0.52-0.78);然而,BP 患者的再次手术率明显更高(RR=3.60;95%CI 2.44-5.32)。BP 和 MP 患者在全身动脉栓塞和感染性心内膜炎方面没有统计学差异(RR=0.93;95%CI 0.66-1.31,RR=1.21;CI95% 0.78-1.88)。使用现代和旧假体的试验结果相似。
BP 和 MP 患者的死亡率以及血栓栓塞事件和心内膜炎的风险相似。BP 患者的出血风险比 MP 患者低约三分之一,而 BP 患者的再次手术风险则高出三倍以上。