• 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

经导管主动脉瓣植入术与低、中度风险患者外科主动脉瓣置换术的比较:随机对照试验的风险特异性荟萃分析。

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients at low and intermediate risk: A risk specific meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

机构信息

West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.

The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2019 Sep 24;14(9):e0221922. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221922. eCollection 2019.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0221922
PMID:31550263
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6759164/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an option for treatment for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high risk for death with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). It is unknown whether TAVI can be safely introduced to intermediate- and low-risk patients.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of TAVI and SAVR in patients with intermediate- and low-surgical risk.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to April 15, 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized controlled trials comparing TAVI with SAVR in patients with intermediate- and low-surgical risk.

DATA EXTRACTION

Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects models to calculate risk ratios (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Two independent reviewers completed citation screening, data abstraction, and risk assessment. Primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 12 months.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 5 trials randomizing 6390 patients were included. In patients with low risk, TAVI was associated with a significant reduction in the composite of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke compared with SAVR (RR, 0.56; 95%CI, 0.40-0.79; I2 = 0%). This benefit was not replicated in patients with intermediate risk (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.80-1.15; I2 = 0%). Similar results were seen separately in all-cause mortality and disabling stroke when TAVI was compared with SAVR.

CONCLUSION

For patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low risk for death from surgery, TAVI achieved superior clinical outcomes compared to SAVR; however, these benefits were not seen in those with intermediate risk. This information may inform discussions about deciding between SAVR and TAVI for patients with low to intermediate risk separately.

摘要

背景

经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)是一种治疗高危外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)的严重主动脉瓣狭窄患者的选择。尚不清楚 TAVI 是否可安全用于中低危患者。

目的

比较 TAVI 与 SAVR 在中低手术风险患者中的疗效和安全性。

数据来源

从建库至 2019 年 4 月 15 日,检索了 Medline、Embase 和 Cochrane 中央对照试验注册库。

研究选择

我们纳入了比较 TAVI 与 SAVR 治疗中低手术风险患者的随机对照试验。

数据提取

使用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析,计算风险比(RR)及其相应的 95%置信区间(CI)。两名独立的审查员完成了引文筛选、数据提取和风险评估。主要结局为 12 个月时全因死亡率或致残性卒中的复合终点。

数据综合

共纳入 5 项随机分配 6390 例患者的试验。在低危患者中,TAVI 与 SAVR 相比,全因死亡率或致残性卒中的复合终点显著降低(RR,0.56;95%CI,0.40-0.79;I²=0%)。但在中危患者中未复制这一结果(RR,0.96;95%CI,0.80-1.15;I²=0%)。当 TAVI 与 SAVR 比较时,全因死亡率和致残性卒中也分别有类似的结果。

结论

对于手术死亡风险低的严重主动脉瓣狭窄患者,TAVI 与 SAVR 相比可获得更好的临床结局;但中危患者则无此获益。这些信息可能有助于分别讨论低危至中危患者选择 SAVR 与 TAVI。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e8cd/6759164/7d3d331b5bcd/pone.0221922.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e8cd/6759164/6fa732385351/pone.0221922.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e8cd/6759164/3926e6c2b297/pone.0221922.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e8cd/6759164/02a29c6cc322/pone.0221922.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e8cd/6759164/7d3d331b5bcd/pone.0221922.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e8cd/6759164/6fa732385351/pone.0221922.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e8cd/6759164/3926e6c2b297/pone.0221922.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e8cd/6759164/02a29c6cc322/pone.0221922.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e8cd/6759164/7d3d331b5bcd/pone.0221922.g004.jpg

相似文献

1
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients at low and intermediate risk: A risk specific meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.经导管主动脉瓣植入术与低、中度风险患者外科主动脉瓣置换术的比较:随机对照试验的风险特异性荟萃分析。
PLoS One. 2019 Sep 24;14(9):e0221922. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221922. eCollection 2019.
2
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis in people with low surgical risk.对于手术风险较低的严重主动脉瓣狭窄患者,经导管主动脉瓣植入术与外科主动脉瓣置换术的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Dec 20;12(12):CD013319. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013319.pub2.
3
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.经导管主动脉瓣植入术与外科主动脉瓣置换术治疗重度主动脉瓣狭窄患者的疗效比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMJ Open. 2021 Dec 6;11(12):e054222. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054222.
4
Meta-Analysis of Effectiveness and Safety of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-to-Intermediate Surgical Risk Cohort.经导管主动脉瓣植入术与外科主动脉瓣置换术治疗低至中度手术风险队列的疗效和安全性的荟萃分析。
Am J Cardiol. 2019 Aug 15;124(4):580-585. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2019.05.017. Epub 2019 May 25.
5
Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Surgical-Risk Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized-Controlled Trials and Propensity-Matched Studies.低手术风险患者经导管与外科主动脉瓣置换术的比较:一项随机对照试验和倾向匹配研究的荟萃分析
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020 May;21(5):612-618. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2019.09.016. Epub 2019 Oct 24.
6
Comparison of late mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement: Insights from a meta-analysis.经导管主动脉瓣植入术与外科主动脉瓣置换术后晚期死亡率的比较:一项荟萃分析的见解
Eur J Intern Med. 2017 May;40:43-49. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2017.01.023. Epub 2017 Feb 3.
7
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation vs. surgical aortic valve replacement for treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis: an updated meta-analysis.经导管主动脉瓣植入术与外科主动脉瓣置换术治疗症状性重度主动脉瓣狭窄的比较:一项更新的荟萃分析。
Eur Heart J. 2019 Oct 7;40(38):3143-3153. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz275.
8
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.经导管主动脉瓣植入术与外科主动脉瓣置换术:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Ann Intern Med. 2016 Sep 6;165(5):334-44. doi: 10.7326/M16-0060. Epub 2016 Jun 7.
9
A meta-analysis of ≥5-year mortality after transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement.经导管主动脉瓣置换术与外科主动脉瓣置换术后≥5年死亡率的荟萃分析。
J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2020 Feb;61(1):107-116. doi: 10.23736/S0021-9509.19.11030-0. Epub 2019 Oct 25.
10
Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low-risk surgical patients: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.低风险外科手术患者经导管主动脉瓣置换术与外科主动脉瓣置换术的比较:随机临床试验的荟萃分析
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019 Oct;20(10):838-842. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.12.023. Epub 2019 Jan 4.

引用本文的文献

1
Temporal validation of 30-day mortality prediction models for transcatheter aortic valve implantation using statistical process control - An observational study in a national population.使用统计过程控制对经导管主动脉瓣植入术30天死亡率预测模型进行时间验证——一项全国性人群的观察性研究
Heliyon. 2023 Jun 10;9(6):e17139. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17139. eCollection 2023 Jun.
2
Comparison of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Devices in Aortic Stenosis: A Network Meta-Analysis of 42,105 Patients.经导管主动脉瓣植入装置治疗主动脉瓣狭窄的比较:42105例患者的网状Meta分析
J Clin Med. 2022 Sep 8;11(18):5299. doi: 10.3390/jcm11185299.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Balloon-Expandable Valve in Low-Risk Patients.经皮球囊扩张式主动脉瓣置换术治疗低危患者。
N Engl J Med. 2019 May 2;380(18):1695-1705. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814052. Epub 2019 Mar 16.
2
Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Self-Expanding Valve in Low-Risk Patients.经导管主动脉瓣置换术治疗低危患者的自膨式瓣膜。
N Engl J Med. 2019 May 2;380(18):1706-1715. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1816885. Epub 2019 Mar 16.
3
Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low-risk surgical patients: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Predictors of Mortality in Patients With Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A National Inpatient Sample Database Analysis.
经导管主动脉瓣植入术患者死亡率的预测因素:一项全国住院患者样本数据库分析。
Cureus. 2021 Apr 7;13(4):e14344. doi: 10.7759/cureus.14344.
4
Update and, internal and temporal-validation of the FRANCE-2 and ACC-TAVI early-mortality prediction models for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) using data from the Netherlands heart registration (NHR).利用荷兰心脏注册(NHR)的数据,对用于经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)的FRANCE - 2和ACC - TAVI早期死亡率预测模型进行更新、内部及时间验证。
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2021 Jan 23;32:100716. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2021.100716. eCollection 2021 Feb.
5
Assessing the safety and efficacy of TAVR compared to SAVR in low-to-intermediate surgical risk patients with aortic valve stenosis: An overview of reviews.评估 TAVR 与 SAVR 在低至中度手术风险的主动脉瓣狭窄患者中的安全性和疗效:系统评价概述。
Int J Cardiol. 2020 Sep 1;314:43-53. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.04.022. Epub 2020 Apr 11.
低风险外科手术患者经导管主动脉瓣置换术与外科主动脉瓣置换术的比较:随机临床试验的荟萃分析
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019 Oct;20(10):838-842. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.12.023. Epub 2019 Jan 4.
4
One-year outcomes of patients with severe aortic stenosis and an STS PROM of less than three percent in the SURTAVI trial.SURTAVI 试验中严重主动脉瓣狭窄且 STS PROM 小于 3%的患者的一年结果。
EuroIntervention. 2018 Oct 20;14(8):877-883. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-18-00460.
5
Three-Year Survival Comparison Between Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement for Intermediate- and Low-Risk Patients.经导管主动脉瓣置换术与外科主动脉瓣置换术治疗中低风险患者的三年生存率比较
Innovations (Phila). 2018 May/Jun;13(3):153-162. doi: 10.1097/IMI.0000000000000507.
6
An updated meta-analysis of TAVR in patients at intermediate risk for SAVR.对中危经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)患者进行经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)的最新荟萃分析。
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019 Jan;20(1):57-69. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.04.001. Epub 2018 Apr 20.
7
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in lower-risk patients: what is the perspective?经导管主动脉瓣植入术在低危患者中的应用:前景如何?
Eur Heart J. 2018 Feb 21;39(8):658-666. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx489.
8
Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients.中危患者的外科手术或经导管主动脉瓣置换术。
N Engl J Med. 2017 Apr 6;376(14):1321-1331. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1700456. Epub 2017 Mar 17.
9
2017 AHA/ACC Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.2017年美国心脏协会/美国心脏病学会对2014年《美国心脏协会/美国心脏病学会瓣膜性心脏病患者管理指南》的重点更新:美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会临床实践指南工作组报告
Circulation. 2017 Jun 20;135(25):e1159-e1195. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000503. Epub 2017 Mar 15.
10
Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis at low and intermediate risk: systematic review and meta-analysis.低中风险重度主动脉瓣狭窄患者经导管与外科主动脉瓣置换术的比较:系统评价与荟萃分析
BMJ. 2016 Sep 28;354:i5130. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i5130.