Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital/McGill University, Montreal, Quebec; Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec.
Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital/McGill University, Montreal, Quebec.
Am J Cardiol. 2020 Apr 15;125(8):1230-1238. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.01.017. Epub 2020 Jan 28.
Current guidelines recommend transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for patients with severe aortic stenosis at elevated surgical risk, but not for patients at low surgical risk. Our objective is to compare major clinical outcomes and procedural complications with TAVI versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis at low surgical risk. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, identified through a systematic search of the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Count data were pooled across trials using random-effects models with inverse variance weighting to obtain relative risks (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Three randomized controlled trials (n = 2,629) were included. At 30 days, TAVI was associated with a substantial reduction in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.45, 95%CI: 0.20 to 0.99), atrial fibrillation (RR: 0.27, 95%CI: 0.17 to 0.41), life threatening/disabling bleeding (RR: 0.29, 95%CI: 0.12 to 0.69), and acute kidney injury (RR: 0.28, 95%CI: 0.14 to 0.57). The reduction in atrial fibrillation persisted at 12 months (RR: 0.32, 95%CI: 0.21 to 0.49). However, TAVI patients had an increased risk of permanent pacemaker implantation at both 30 days (RR: 3.13, 95%CI: 1.36 to 7.21) and 12 months (RR: 2.99, 95%CI: 1.19 to 7.51). Due to the low absolute numbers of events, results were inconclusive at 30 days and 12 months for cardiovascular mortality, stroke, transient ischemic attack, and myocardial infarction. In conclusion, while some outcomes remained inconclusive, these data suggest that TAVI should be considered as a first-line therapy for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis in low surgical risk patients.
目前的指南建议对手术风险较高的严重主动脉瓣狭窄患者进行经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI),但不建议对手术风险较低的患者进行 TAVI。我们的目的是比较 TAVI 与外科主动脉瓣置换术在手术风险较低的严重主动脉瓣狭窄患者中的主要临床结局和手术并发症。我们对 MEDLINE、Embase 和 Cochrane 数据库进行了系统检索,以进行系统评价和荟萃分析。使用随机效应模型和倒数方差加权法对试验间的计数数据进行汇总,以获得相对风险(RR)和相应的 95%置信区间(CI)。纳入了三项随机对照试验(n=2629 例)。在 30 天时,TAVI 显著降低了全因死亡率(RR:0.45,95%CI:0.20 至 0.99)、心房颤动(RR:0.27,95%CI:0.17 至 0.41)、危及生命/致残性出血(RR:0.29,95%CI:0.12 至 0.69)和急性肾损伤(RR:0.28,95%CI:0.14 至 0.57)。心房颤动的减少在 12 个月时仍持续存在(RR:0.32,95%CI:0.21 至 0.49)。然而,TAVI 患者在 30 天(RR:3.13,95%CI:1.36 至 7.21)和 12 个月(RR:2.99,95%CI:1.19 至 7.51)时永久性起搏器植入的风险增加。由于事件的绝对数量较低,在 30 天和 12 个月时,心血管死亡率、卒中和短暂性脑缺血发作和心肌梗死的结果仍不确定。总之,尽管一些结果仍不确定,但这些数据表明,对于手术风险较低的严重主动脉瓣狭窄患者,TAVI 应被视为一线治疗方法。